OUR  PLACE  AMONG  INFINITIES. 


A   SERIES    OF   ESSAYS 

CONTRASTING   OUR   LITTLE   ABODE   IN   SPACE  AND 
TIME   WITH   THE   INFINITIES   AROUND   US. 


TO  WHICH  ARE   ADDED   ESSAYS  ON 

THE  JEWISH  SABBATH  AND  ASTROLOGY. 


BY 
RICHD.   A.    PROCTOR, 

AUTHOR  OF   "  SATURN   AND  ITS   SYSTEM,"    "  THE   UNIVERSE,"    "  THE  EXPANSE 
OP   HEAVEN,"    ETC,    ETC 


"  Nous  n'avons  point  la  mesure  de  cette  machine  immense ;  nous  n'en  pouvons 
calculer  les  rapports ;  nous  n'en  connaissons  ni  les  premieres  lois,  ni  la  cause  finale." — 

J.  J.  ROUSSKAU. 

"  Freue  dich,  h5chstes  Geschopf  der  Natur,  du  fuhlest  dich  fahig, 
Ihr  den  hochsten  Gedanken,  zu  dera  sie  schaffend  sich  aufschwang, 
Nachzudenken." 

GOETHE. 


NEW    YORK: 
D.    APPLETON    AND    COMPANY, 

549    AND    551    BROADWAY. 
1876. 


SRLF 
YRL 

*/45IS52\ 

PREFACE. 


THIS  work  takes  its  name  from  the  essays  occupying  the 
first  seventy  pages  of  the  book ;  but  the  later  essays,  as 
shewing  the  nature  of  those  parts  of  the  universe  which 
lie  nearest  to  us,  are  properly  included  under  the  same 
title.  Even  those  on  Astrology  and  the  Jewish  Sabbath 
belong  to  the  discussion  of  our  place  among  infinities ; 
for  it  was  their  ignorance  of  the  earth's  place  among 
infinities,  which  led  the  ancients  to  regard  the  heavenly 
bodies  as  ruling,  favourably  or  adversely,  the  fates  of  men 
and  nations,  and  to  dedicate  the  days  in  sets  of  seven  to 
the  seven  planets  of  their  astrological  system. 

It  will  be  seen,  that  my  views  respecting  the  interesting 
question  of  life  in  other  worlds  have  changed  considerably 
since  I  wrote  the  work  bearing  that  title.  I  still  consider 
that  work  a  sound  exposition  of  the  theory  of  the  plurality 
of  worlds,  though  I  consider  that  the  weight  of  evidence 
favours  my  theory  of  the  (relative)  paucity  of  worlds. 

RICHD.  A.  PROCTOR. 

Sept.  27,  1875. 


CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

PAST  AND  FUTURE  OF  THE  EARTH,      ....  1 

SEEMING  WASTES  IN  NATURE,             ....  35 

NEW  THEORY  OF  LIFE  IN  OTHER  WORLDS,       ...  45 
A  MISSING  COMET,      .           .           .           .           .           .71 

THE  LOST  COMET  AND  ITS  METEOR  TRAIN,      ...  91 

JUPITER,         .......  109 

SATURN  AND  ITS  SYSTEM,        .....  128 

A  GIANT  SUN,             ......  156 

THE  STAR  DEPTHS,      ......  182 

STAR  GAUGING,           ......  218 

SATURN  AND  THE  SABBATH  OF  THE  JEWS,        .           .         . .  290 

THOUGHTS  ON  ASTROLOGY,      .....  314 

NOTE — Most  of  these  Essays  have  been   reprinted  from  current 
periodicals. 


THE  PAST  AND  FUTURE  OF  OUR  EARTH  * 

"  Ut  his  exordia  primis 

Omnia,  et  ipse  tener  Mundi  concreverit  orbis. 
Turn  durare  solum,  et  discludere  Nerea  ponto 
Coeperit,  et  rerum  paullatim  sumere  fonnas." 

VIRGIL. 

THE  subject  with  which  I  am  about  to  deal  is  associated 
by  many  with  questions  of  religion.  Let  me  premise, 
however,  that  I  do  not  thus  view  it  myself.  It  seems  to 
me  impossible  to  obtain  from  science  any  clear  ideas 
respecting  the  ways  or  nature  of  the  Deity,  or  even 
respecting  the  reality  of  an  Almighty  personal  God. 
Science  deals  with  the  finite  though  it  may  carry  our 
thoughts  to  the  infinite.  Infinity  of  space  and  of  matter 
occupying  space,  of  time  and  of  the  processes  with  which 
time  is  occupied,  and  infinity  of  energy  as  necessarily 
implied  by  the  infinities  of  matter  and  of  the  operations 

*  This  essay  presents  the  substance  of  a  lecture  delivered  in  New  York 
on  April  3,  1874,  being  the  first  of  a  subsidiary  series  in  which,  of  set 
purpose  (and  in  accordance  with  the  request  of  several  esteemed  friends), 
I  dealt  less  with  the  direct  teachings  of  astronomy,  which  had 
occupied  me  in  a  former  series,  than  with  ideas  suggested  by  astronomi- 
cal facts,  and  more  particularly  by  the  discoveries  made  during  the 
last  quarter  of  a  century. 


2  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

affecting  matter, — these  infinities  science  brings  clearly 
before  us.  For  science  directs  our  thoughts  to  the  finites 
to  which  these  infinites  correspond.  It  shows  us  that 
there  can  be  no  conceivable  limits  to  space  or  time,  and 
though  finiteness  of  matter  or  of  operation  may  be  conceiv- 
able, there  is  manifest  incongruity  in  assuming  an  infinite 
disproportion  between  unoccupied  and  occupied  space,  or 
between  void  time  and  time  occupied  with  the  occurrence 
of  events  of  what  sort  soever.  So  that  the  teachings  of 
science  bring  us  into  the  presence  of  the  unquestionable 
infinities  of  time  and  of  space,  and  the  presumable  infin- 
ities of  matter  and  of  operation, — hence,  therefore,  into 
the  presence  of  infinity  of  energy.  But  science  teaches  us 
nothing  about  these  infinities,  as  such.  They  remain 
none  the  less  inconceivable,  however  clearly  we  may  be 
taught  to  recognise  their  reality.  Moreover,  these  infinites, 
including  the  infinity  of  energy,  are  material  infinities. 
Science  tells  us  nothing  of  the  infinite  attributes  of  an 
Almighty  Being ;  it  presents  to  us  no  personal  infinites, 
whether  of  Power,  Beneficence,  or  Wisdom.  Science  may 
suggest  some  ideas  on  these  points  ;  though  we  perceive 
daily  more  and  more  clearly  that  it  is  unsafe  to  accept  as 
her  teaching  ideas  which  commonly  derive  their  colouring 
from  our  own  prepossessions.  And  assuredly,  as  respects 
actual  facts,  Science  in  so  far  as  she  presents  personal 
infinity  to  us  at  all,  presents  it  as  an  inconceivable,  like 
those  other  inconceivable  infinities,  with  the  finites 
corresponding  to  which  her  operations  are  alone  directly 
concerned.  To  speak  in  plain  terms — so  far  as  Science 


The  Past  and  Future  of  our  Earth.  3 

is  concerned,  the  idea  of  a  personal  God  is  inconceivable,* 
as  are  all  the  attributes  which  religion  recognizes  in  such 
a  Being.  On  the  other  hand,  it  should  be  admitted  as 
distinctly,  that  Science  no  more  disproves  the  existence  of 
infinite  personal  power  or  wisdom  than  she  disproves  the 
existence  of  infinite  material  energy  (which  on  the  contrary 
must  be  regarded  as  probable)  or  the  existence  of  infinite 
space  or  time  (which  must  be  regarded  as  certain). 

So  much  premised,  we  may  proceed  to  inquire  into  the 
probable  past  and  future  of  our  earth,  as  calmly  as  we 
should  inquire  into  the  probable  past  and  future  of  a 
pebble,  a  weed,  or  an  insect,  of  a  rock,  a  tree,  or  an  animal, 
of  a  continent,  or  of  a  type — whether  of  vegetable  or  of 
animal  life.  The  beginning  of  all  things  is  not  to  be  reached, 
not  appreciably  to  be  even  approached,  by  a  few  steps 
backward  in  imagination,  nor  the  end  of  all  things  by  a 
few  steps  forward.  Such  a  thought  is  as  unfounded  as 
was  the  fear  of  men  in  old  times  that  by  travelling  too 
far  in  any  direction  they  might  pass  over  the  earth's  edge 
and  be  plunged  into  the  abyss  beyond,  as  unreasonable 

*  I  mean  these  words  to  be  understood  literally.  To  the  man  of 
science,  observing  the  operation  of  second  causes  in  every  process  with 
which  his  researches  deal,  and  finding  no  limit  to  the  operation  of  such 
causes  however  far  back  he  may  trace  the  chain  of  causation,  the  idea  of  a 
first  cause  is  as  inconceivable  in  its  relation  to  observed  scientific  facts  as 
is  the  idea  of  infinite  space  in  its  relation  to  the  finite  space  to  which  the 
observations  of  science  extend.  Yet  infinite  space  must  be  admitted  ; 
nor  do  I  see  how  even  that  man  of  science  who  would  limit  his  thoughts 
most  rigidly  to  facts,  can  admit  that  all  things  are  of  which  he  thinks, 
without  having  impressed  upon  him  the  feeling  that,  in  some  way  he 
cannot  understand,  these  things  represent  the  operation  of  Infinite 
Purpose.  Assuredly  we  do  not  avoid  the  inconceivable  by  assuming  as 
at  least  possible  that  matter  exists  only  as  it  affects  our  perceptions. 


4  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

as  was  the  hope  that  by  increase  of  telescopic  range 
astronomers  could  approach  the  imagined  "  heavens  above 
the  crystalline." 

In  considering  the  probable  past  history  of  the  earth,  we 
are  necessarily  led  to  inquire  into  the  origin  of  the  solar 
system.  I  have  already  sketched  two  theories  of  the 
system,  and  described  the  general  facts  on  which  both 
theories  are  based.  The  various  planets  circle  in  one 
direction  around  the  sun,  the  sun  rotating  in  the  same 
direction,  the  satellite  families  (with  one  noteworthy  but 
by  no  means  inexplicable  exception)  travelling  round  their 
primaries  in  the  same  direction,  and  all  the  planets  whose 
rotation  has  been  determined  still  preserving  the  same 
direction  of  circulation  (so  to  speak).  These  relations 
seem  to  point,  in  a  manner  there  is  no  mistaking,  to  a 
process  of  evolution  by  which  those  various  parts  of  the 
solar  system  which  now  form  discrete  masses  were  de- 
veloped from  a  former  condition  characterized  by  a  certain 
unity  as  respects  the  manner  of  its  circulation.  One 
theory  of  this  process  of  evolution,  Laplace's,  implies  the 
contraction  of  the  solar  system  from  a  great  rotating 
nebulous  mass  ;  according  to  the  other  theory,  the  solar 
system,  instead  of  contracting  to  its  present  condition,  was 
formed  by  a  process  of  accretion,  due  to  the  indrawing  of 
great  flights  of  meteoric  and  cometic  matter. 

I  need  not  here  enter  at  length,  for  I  have  already  done 
so  elsewhere,  into  the  astronomical  evidence  in  favour  of 
either  theory  ;  but  it  will  be  well  to  present  briefly  some 
of  the  more  striking  facts. 


The  Past  and  Future  of  our  Earth.  5 

Among  the  various  forms  of  nebulae  (or  star-cloudlets) 
revealed  by  the  telescope,  we  find  many  which  seem,  to 
accord  with  our  ideas  as  to  some  of  the  stages  through 
which  our  solar  system  must  have  passed  in  changing 
from  the  nebulous  condition  to  its  present  form.  The 
irregular  nebulae, — such,  for  instance,  as  that  wonderful 
nebula  in  the  Sword  of  Orion, — shew  by  their  enormous 
extension  the  existence  of  sufficient  quantities  of  gaseous 
matter  to  form  systems  as  large  and  as  massive  as  our 
own,  or  even  far  vaster.  We  know  from  the  teachings  of 
the  spectroscope  that  these  irregular  nebulas  do  really  con- 
sist of  glowing  gas  (as  Sir  W.  Herschel  long  since  sur- 
mised), hydrogen  and  nitrogen  being  presumably  present, 
though  the  spectrum  of  neither  gas  appears  in  its  com- 
plete form  (one  line  only  of  each  spectrum  being  shewn, 
instead  of  the  sets  of  lines  usually  given  by  these  gases). 
An  American  physicist  has  suggested  that  hydrogen  and 
nitrogen  exist  in  the  gaseous  nebulae  in  an  elementary 
condition,  these  gases  really  being  compound,  and  he 
suggests  further  that  all  our  so-called  elements  may  have 
been  derived  from  those  elementary  forms  of  hydrogen  and 
nitrogen.  In  the  absence  of  any  evidence  from  observation 
or  experiment,  these  ideas  must  be  regarded  as  merely 
speculative  ;  and  I  think  that  we  arrive  here  at  a  point 
where  speculation  helps  us  as  little  as  it  does  in  attempting 
to  trace  the  evolution  of  living  creatures  across  the  gap 
which  separates  the  earliest  forms  of  life  from  the 
beginning  itself  of  life  upon  the  earth.  Since  we  cannot 
hope  to  determine  the  real  beginning  of  the  earth's  history, 


6  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

we  need  not  at  present  attempt  to  pass  back  beyond  the 
earliest  stage  of  which  we  have  any  clear  information. 

Passing  from  the  irregular  nebulae,  in  which  we  see 
chaotic  masses  of  gaseous  matter  occupying  millions  of 
millions  of  cubic  miles  and  scattered  as  wildly  through 
space  as  clouds  are  scattered  in  a  storm-swept  air,  we 
come  to  various  orders  of  nebulae  in  which  we  seem  to 
find  clear  evidence  of  a  process  of  evolution.  We  see 
first  the  traces  of  a  central  aggregation.  This  aggregation 
becomes  more  and  more  clearly  defined,  until  there  is  no 
possibility  of  mistaking  its  nature  as  a  centre  having 
power  (by  virtue  of  the  quantity  of  matter  contained  in  it) 
to  influence  the  motions  of  the  matter  belonging  to  the  rest 
of  the  nebula.  Then,  still  passing  be  it  remembered  from 
nebula  to  nebula,  and  only  inferring,  not  actually  witness- 
ing, the  changes  described, — we  see  a  subordinate  aggrega- 
tion, wherein,  after  a  while,  the  greater  portion  of  the 
mass  of  the  nebula  outside  the  central  aggregation 
becomes  gathered,  even  as  Jupiter  contains  the  greater 
portion  of  the  mass  of  the  solar  system  outside  the  central 
sun.*  Next  we  see  a  second  subordinate  aggregation, 
inferior  to  the  first,  but  comprising,  if  we  judge  from  its 
appearance,  by  far  the  greater  portion  of  what  remained 
after  the  first  aggregation  had  been  formed, — even  as 
Saturn's  mass  far  exceeds  the  combined  mass  of  all  the 
planets  less  than  himself,  and  so  comprises  far  the  greater 
portion  of  the  solar  system  after  account  has  been  taken 

*  The  mass  of  Jupiter  exceeds,  in  the  proportion  of  five  to  two,  the 
combined  mass  of  all  the  remaining  planets. 


The  Past  and  Future  of  our  Earth.          7 

of  Jupiter  and  the  sun.*  And  we  may  infer  that  the 
other  parts  of  nebulae  contain  smaller  aggregations  not 
perceptible  to  us,  out  of  which  the  smaller  planets  of  the 
developing  system  are  hereafter  to  be  formed. 

Side  views  of  some  of  these  nebulae  indicate  a  flatness 
of  figure  agreeing  well  with  the  general  tendency  of  the 
members  of  the  solar  system  towards  the  medial  plane  of 
that  system.  For  the  solar  system  may  be  described  as 
flat,  and  if  the  nebulae  I  have  been  dealing  with  (the 
spiral  nebulae  with  aggregations)  were  globular  we  could 
not  recognise  in  them  the  true  analogues  of  our  solar 
system  in  the  earlier  stages  of  its  history.  But  the 
telescope  reveals  nebulae  manifestly  corresponding  in 
appearance  to  the  great  whirlpool  nebula  of  Lord  Rosse, 
as  it  would  appear  if  it  is  a  somewhat  flattened  spiral  and 
could  be  viewed  nearly  edgewise. 

And  here  I  may  pause  to  note  that,  although,  in  thus 
inferring  progressive  changes  where  in  reality  we  have 
but  various  forms  of  nebulae,  I  have  been  adopting  an 
assumption  and  one  which  no  one  can  hope  either  to  verify 
or  to  disprove,  yet  it  must  be  remembered  that  these 
nebulae  by  their  very  figure  indicate  that  they  are  not  at 
rest.  If  they  consist  of  matter  possessing  the  attribute  of 
gravitation, — and  it  would  be  infinitely  more  daring  to 
assert  that  they  do  not  than  that  they  do, — then  they 
must  be  undergoing  processes  of  change.  Nor  can  we 
conceive  that  discrete  gaseous  masses  in  whorls  spirally 

*  The  mass  of  Saturn  exceeds,  in  the  proportion  of  nearly  three  to 
one,  the  combined  mass  of  all  the  planets  smaller  than  himself. 


8  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

arranged  around  a  great  central  aggregation  (taking  one 
of  the  earlier  stages)  could  otherwise  change  than  by 
aggregating  towards  their  centre,  unless  we  admit  motions 
of  revolution  (in  orbits  more  or  less  eccentric)  the  con- 
tinuance of  which  would  necessarily  lead,  through 
collisions,  to  the  rapid  growth  of  the  central  aggregation, 
and  to  the  formation  and  slower  growth  of  subordinate 
gatherings. 

I  have  shown  elsewhere  how  the  formation  of  our  solar 
system,  in  the  manner  supposed,  would  explain  what 
Laplace  admitted  that  he  could  not  explain  by  his  theory, 
— the  peculiar  arrangement  of  the  masses  forming  the 
solar  system.  The  laws  of  dynamics  tell  us,  that  no 
matter  what  the  original  configuration  or  motion  of  the 
masses,  probably  gaseous,  forming  the  nebula,  the  motions 
of  these  masses  would  have  greater  and  greater  velocity 
tlie  nearer  the  masses  were  to  the  central  aggregation, 
each  distance  indicating  certain  limits  between  which  the 
velocities  must  inevitably  lie.  For  example,  in  our  solar 
system,  supposing  the  central  sun  had  already  attained 
very  nearly  his  full  growth  as  respects  quantity  of  matter, 
then  the  velocity  of  any  mass  whatever  belonging  to  the 
system,  would  at'  Jupiter's  distance  be  less  than  twelve 
miles  per  second,  whereas  at  the  distance  of  the  earth,  the 
largest  planet  travelling  inside  the  orbit  of  Jupiter,  the 
limit  of  the  velocity  would  be  more  than  twice  as  great. 
Hence  we  can  see  with  what  comparative  difficulty  an 
aggregation  would  form  close  to  the  central  one,  and  how 
the  first  subordinate  aggregation  would  lie  at  a  distance 


The  Past  and  Future  of  our  Earth.  9 

where  the  quantity  of  matter  was  still  great  but  the 
average  velocity  of  motion  not  too  great.  Such  an 
aggregation  once  formed,  the  next  important  aggregation 
would  necessarily  lie  far  outside,  for  within  the  first  there 
would  now  be  two  disturbing  influences  preventing  the 
rapid  growth  of  these  aggregations.  The  third  and  fourth 
would  be  outside  the  second.  Between  the  first  aggrega- 
tion and  the  sun  only  small  planets,  like  the  Earth  and 
Venus,  Mars,  Mercury,  and  the  asteroids,  could  form  ;  and 
we  should  expect  to  find  that  the  largest  of  the  four  small 
planets  would  be  in  the  middle  of  the  space  belonging  to 
the  family,  (as  Venus  and  the  Earth  are  actually  placed), 
while  the  much  smaller  planets  Mercury  and  Mars  travel 
next  on  either  side,  one  close  to  the  Sun  and  the  other 
next  to  Jupiter,  the  asteroids  indicating  the  region  where 
the  combined  disturbing  influences  of  Jupiter  and  the  Sun 
prevented  any  single  planet  from  being  developed. 

But  I  should  require  much  more  time  than  is  now  at 
my  command  to  present  adequately  the  reasoning  on 
which  the  theory  of  accretion  is  based.  And  we  are  not 
concerned  here  to  inquire  whether  this  theory,  or  Laplace's 
theory  of  contraction,  or  (which  I  hold  to  be  altogether 
more  probable  than  either)  a  theory  involving  combined 
processes  of  accretion  and  contraction,  be  the  true 
hypothesis  of  the  evolution  of  the  solar  system.  Let  it 
suffice  that  we  recognise  as  one  of  the  earliest  stages  of 
our  earth's  history,  her  condition  as  a  rotating  mass  of 
glowing  vapour,  capturing  then  as  now,  but  far  more 
actively  then  than  now,  masses  of  matter  which  approached 


IO  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

near  enough,  and  growing  by  these  continual  indraughts 
from  without.  From  the  very  beginning,  as  it  would 
seem,  the  earth  grew  in  this  way.  This  firm  earth  on 
which  we  live  represents  an  aggregation  of  matter  not 
from  one  portion  of  space,  but  from  all  space.  All  that  is 
upon  and  within  the  earth,  all  vegetable  forms  and  all 
animals  forms,  our  bodies,  our  brains,  are  formed  of 
materials  which  have  been  drawn  in  from  those  depths  of 
space  surrounding  us  on  all  sides.  This  hand  that  I  am 
now  raising  contains  particles  which  have  travelled  hither 
from  regions  far  away  amid  the  northern  and  southern 
constellations,  particles  drawn  in  towards  the  earth  by 
processes  continuing  millions  of  millions  of  ages,  until 
after  multitudinous  changes  the  chapter  of  accidents  has 
so  combined  them,  and  so  distributed  them  in  plants  and 
animals,  that  after  coming  to  form  portions  of  my  food 
they  are  here  present  before  you.  Passing  from  the  mere 
illustration  of  the  thought,  is  not  the  thought  itself  strik- 
ing and  suggestive,  that  not  only  the  earth  on  which  we 
move,  but  everything  we  see  or  touch,  and  every  particle  in 
body  and  brain,  has  sped  during  countless  ages  through 
the  immensity  of  space  ? 

The  great  mass  of  glowing  gas  which  formed  our  earth 
in  the  earliest  stage  of  its  history  was  undergoing  two 
noteworthy  processes, — first,  the  process  of  cooling  by 
which  the  mass  was  eventually  to  become  at  least  partially 
solid,  and  secondly  a  process  pf  growth  due  to  the  gather- 
ing in  of  meteoric  and  cometic  matter.  As  respects  the 
latter  process,  which  will  not  hereafter  occupy  our  atten- 


The  Past  and  Future  of  our  Earth.         1 1 

tion,  I  must  remark  that  many  astronomers,  appear  to  me 
to  give  far  less  consideration  to  the  inferences  certainly 
deducible  from  recent  discoveries  than  the  importance  of 
these  discoveries  would  fairly  warrant.  It  is  now 
absolutely  certain  that  hour  by  hour,  day  by  day,  and 
year  by  year,  the  earth  is  gathering  in  matter  from  with- 
out. On  the  most  moderate  assumption  as  to  the  average 
weight  of  meteors  and  shooting  stars,  the  earth  must 
increase  each  year  in  mass  by  many  thousands  of  tons. 
And  when  we  consider  the  enormous,  one  may  almost  say 
the  awful  time-intervals  which  have  elapsed  since  the 
earth  was  in  a  gaseous  condition,  we  cannot  but  perceive 
that  the  process  of  accretion  now  going  on  indicates  the 
existence  of  only  the  merest  residue  of  matter  (ungathered) 
compared  with  that  which  at  the  beginning  of  those 
time-intervals  was  freely  moving  around  the  central 
aggregation.  The  process  of  accretion  which  now  does 
not  sensibly  increase  the  earth's  mass  was  then  a  process 
of  actual  growth.  Jupiter  and  Saturn  might  then  no 
longer  be  gathering  in  matter  appreciably  increasing  their 
mass,  although  the  quantity  of  matter  gathered  in  by  them 
must  have  been  far  larger  than  all  that  the  other  forming 
earth  could  gather  in  equal  times.  For  those  planets  were 
then  as  now  so  massive  that  any  possible  increment  from 
without  was  as  nothing  compared  with  the  mass  they  had 
already  attained.  We  have  to  throw  back  into  yet  more 
awful  time-depths  the  birth  and  growth  of  those  giant 
orbs.  And  even  those  depths  of  time  are  as  nothing 
compared  with  the  intervals  which  have  elapsed  since  the 


1 2  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

sun  himself  began  to  be.  Yet  it  is  with  time-intervals 
measurable  by  hundreds  of  millions  of  years  that  we  have 
to  deal  in  considering  only  our  earth's  history, — nay,  two 
or  three  hundred  millions  of  years  only  carry  us  back  to  a 
period  when  the  earth  was  in  a  stage  of  development  long 
sequent  to  the  gaseous  condition  we  are  now  considering. 
That  the  supply  of  meteoric  and  cometic  matter  not 
gathered  in  was  then  enormously  greater  than  that  which 
still  exists  within  the  solar  domain,  appears  to  me  not  a 
mere  fanciful  speculation,  nor  even  a  theoretical  considera- 
tion, but  as  nearly  a  certainty  as  anything  not  admitting 
of  mathematical  demonstration  can  possibly  be.  That  the 
rate  of  in-gathering  at  that  time  enormously  exceeded  the 
present  rate,  may  be  regarded  as  certain.  That  the 
increase  resulting  from  such  in-gathering  during  the 
hundreds  of  millions  of  years  that  it  has  been  in  operation 
since  the  period  when  the  earth  first  existed  as  a  gaseous 
mass,  must  have  resulted  in  adding  a  quantity  of  matter 
forming  no  inconsiderable  aliquot  part  of  the  earth's 
present  mass,  seems  to  me  a  reasonable  inference,  although 
it  is  certain  that  the  present  rate  of  growth  continued  even 
for  hundreds  of  millions  of  years  would  not  appreciably 
affect  the  earth's  mass.*  And  it  is  a  thought  worthy  of 
consideration,  in  selecting  between  Laplace's  theory  of 
contraction  and  the  theory  of  accretion,  that  accretion 
being  a  process  necessarily  exhaustive,  we  are  able  to 

*  It  is,  perhaps,  hardly  necessary  to  explain  that  I  refer  here  not  to 
absolute  but  to  relative  increase.  The  absolute  increase  of  mass 
would  amount  to  many  millions  of  tons,  but  the  earth  would  not  be  in- 
creased by  the  billionth  part  of  her  present  mass. 


The  Past  and  Future  of  our  Earth.         1 3 

trace  it  back  through  stages  of  gradually  increasing 
activity  without  limit  until  we  reach  that  stage  when  the 
whole  of  the  matter  now  forming  our  solar  system  was  as 
yet  unformed.  Contraction  may  alternate  with  expansion, 
according  to  the  changing  condition  of  a  forming  system  ; 
but  accretion  is  a  process  which  can  only  act  in  one 
direction ;  and  as  accretion  is  certainly  going  on  now, 
however  slowly,  we  have  but  to  trace  back  the  process  to 
be  led  inevitably,  in  my  judgment,  to  regard  our  system 
as  having  its  origin  in  processes  of  accretion, — though  it 
seems  equally  clear  that  each  individual  orb  of  the  system, 
if  not  each  subordinate  scheme  within  it,  has  also  under- 
gone a  process  of  contraction  from  a  former  nebulous 
condition. 

In  this  early  gaseous  stage  our  earth  was  preparing  as 
it  were  to  become  a  sun.  As  yet  her  gaseous  globe 
probably  extended  beyond  the  smaller  aggregation  out  of 
which  the  moon  was  one  day  to  be  formed.  This  may  be 
inferred,  I  think,  from  the  law  of  the  moon's  rotation.  It 
is  true  that  a  moon  independently  created,  and  started  on 
the  moon's  present  course,  with  a  rotation-period  nearly 
equalling  its  period  of  revolution,  would  gradually  have 
acquired  a  rotation-period  exactly  equalling  the  mean 
period  of  revolution.  But  there  is  no  reason  in  nature 
why  there  should  have  been  any  such  near  approach ; 
whereas,  if  we  suppose  the  moon's  gaseous  globe  to  have 
been  originally  entangled  within  the  outskirts  of  the  earth's, 
we  see  that  the  peculiar  relation  in  question  would  have 
prevailed  from  the  beginning  of  the  moon's  existence  as  a 


1 4  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

separate  body.  The  laws  of  dynamics  show  us,  moreover, 
that  although  the  conditions  under  which  the  moon  moved 
and  rotated  must  have  undergone  considerable  changes 
since  her  first  formation,  yet  that  since  those  changes  took 
place  very  slowly,  the  rotation  of  the  moon  would  be 
gradually  modified,  pari  passu,  so  that  the  peculiar 
relation  between  the  moon's  rotation  and  revolution  would 
continue  unimpaired.* 

In  her  next  stage,  our  earth  is  presented  to  us  as  a  sun. 
It  may  be  that  at  that  time  the  moon  was  the  abode  of 
life,  our  earth  affording  the  supplies  of  light  and  heat 
necessary  for  the  wants  of  creatures  living  on  the  moon. 
But  whether  this  were  so  or  not,  it  may  be  safely  assumed 
that  when  the  earth's  contracting  gaseous  globe  first  began 
to  have  liquid  or  solid  matter  in  its  constitution,  the  earth 
must  have  been  a  sun  so  far  as  the  emission  of  heat  and 
light  were  concerned.  I  must  warn  you,  however,  against 
an  undue  regard  for  analogy  which  has  led  some 
astronomers  to  say  that  all  the  members  of  the  solar 
system  have  passed  or  will  pass  through  exactly  similar 
stages.  That  our  earth  once  gave  out  light  and  heat,  as 
the  sun  does  now,  may  be  admitted  as  probable  ;  and  we 
may  believe  that  later  the  earth  presented  the  character- 
istics which  we  now  recognize  in  Jupiter ;  while  hereafter 

*  On  the  theory  of  evolution  some  such  view  of  the  origin  of  the 
moon's  rotation  must  be  adopted,  unless  the  matter  be  regarded  as  the 
result  of  a  strange  chance.  If  we  believe,  on  the  contrary,  that  the 
arrangement  was  specially  ordained  by  the  Creator,  we  are  left  to 
wonder  what  useful  purpose  a  relation  so  peculiar  and  so  artificial  can 
have  been  intended  to  subserve. 


The  Past  and  Future  of  our  Earth.         1 5 

it  may  pass  through  a  stage  comparable  with  that  through 
which  our  moon  is  now  passing.  But  we  must  remember 
that  the  original  quantity  of  matter  in  any  orb  passing 
through  such  stages  must  very  importantly  modify  the 
actual  condition  of  the  orb  in  each  of  those  stages,  as  well, 
of  course,  as  the  duration  of  each  stage ;  and  it  may  even 
be  that  no  two  orbs  in  the  universe  were  ever  in  the  same, 
or  very  nearly  the  same  condition,  and  that  no  change 
undergone  by  one  has  corresponded  closely  with  any 
change  undergone  by  another. 

We  know  so  little  respecting  the  sun's  actual  condition, 
that  even  if  we  could  be  assured  that  in  any  past  stages  of 
her  history  the  earth  was  nearly  in  the  same  state,  we 
should  nevertheless  remain  in  almost  complete  ignorance  as 
to  the  processes  to  which  the  earth's  orb  was  at  that  time 
subject.  In  particular  we  have  no  means  of  forming  an 
opinion  as  to  the  manner  in  which  the  elementary 
constituents  of  the  earth's  globe  were  situated  when  she 
was  in  the  sun-like  stage.  We  may  adopt  some  general 
theory  of  the  sun's  present  condition ;  for  example,  we  may 
accept  the  ingenious  reasoning  by  which  Professor  Young, 
of  Darmouth,  N.H.,  has  supported  his  theory  that  the  sun 
is  a  gigantic  bubble  ;*  but  we  should  be  far  from  having 

*"The  eruptions  which  are  all  the  time"  (Anglke,  'always')  "occurring 
on  the  sun's  surface,"  says  Professor  Young,  "almost  compel  the  sup- 
position that  there  is  a  crust  of  some  kind  which  restrains  the  im- 
prisoned gases,  and  through  which  they  force  their  way  with  great 
violence.  This  crust  may  consist  of  a  more  or  less  continuous  sheet  of 
rain, — not  of  water,  of  course,  but  of  materials  whose  vapours  are 
shown  by  means  of  the  spectroscope  to  exist  in  the  solar  atmosphere, 
and  whose  condensations  and  combinations  are  supposed  to  furnish  the 


1 6  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

any  exact  idea  of  the  processes  actually  taking  place 
within  the  solar  globe,  even  if  we  were  absolutely  certain 
that  that  or  some  other  general  theory  were  the  true  one. 

Assuming  that  our  earth,  when  in  the  sun-like  stage,  was 
a  gaseous  mass  within  a  liquid  non-permanent  shell,  we 
can  see  that  as  the  process  of  cooling  went  on  the  showers 
forming  the  shell  would  attain  a  greater  and  greater  depth, 
the  shell  thus  becoming  thicker,  the  space  within  the  shell 
becoming  less,  the  whole  earth  contracting  until  it  became 
entirely  liquid;  or  rather  these  changes  would  progress 
until  no  considerable  portion  of  the  earth  would  be 
gaseous,  for  doubtless  long  before  this  stage  was  reached 
large  portions  of  the  earth  would  have  become  solid.  As 
to  the  position  which  the  solid  parts  of  the  earth's  globe 
would  assume  when  the  first  processes  of  solidification 
took  place,  we  must  not  fall  into  the  mistake  of  judging 
from  the  formation  of  a  crust  of  ice  on  freezing  water  that 

solar  heat.  The  continuous  outflow  of  the  solar  heat  is  equivalent  to 
the  supply  that  would  be  developed  by  the  condensation  from  steam  to 
vapour  of  a  layer  about  five  feet  thick  over  the  whole  surface  of  the 
sun  per  minute.  As  this  tremendous  rain  descends,  tke  velocity  of  the 
falling  drops  would  be  increased  by  the  resistance  of  the  dense  gases 
underneath,  the  drops  would  increase  until  continuous  sheets  would  be 
formed  ;  and  the  sheets  would  unite  and  form  a  sort  of  bottomless  ocean, 
resting  upon  the  compressed  vapours  beneath  and  pierced  by  innu- 
merable ascending  jets  and  bubbles.  It  would  have  nearly  a  constant 
depth  in  thickness,  because  it  would  re-evaporate  at  the  bottom  nearly 
as  fast  as  it  would  grow  by  the  descending  rains  above,  though  pro- 
bably the  thickness  of  this  sheet  would  continually  increase  at  some 
slow  rate,  and  its  whole  diameter  diminish.  In  other  words,  the  sun, 
according  to  this  view,  is  a  gigantic  bubble,  whose  walls  are  gradually 
thickening  and  its  diameter  diminishing  at  a  rate  determined  by  its 
loss  of  heat.  It  differs,  however,  from  ordinary  bubbles  in  the  fact  that 
its  skin  is  constantly  penetrated  by  blasts  and  jets  from  within." 


The  Past  and  Future  of  our  Earth.         1 7 

these  solid  parts  would  form  a  crust  upon  the  earth. 
Water  presents  an  exception  to  other  substances,  in  being 
denser  in  the  liquid  form  than  as  a  solid.  Some  metals  and 
alloys  are  like  water  in  this  respect ;  but  with  most 
earthy  substances,  "  and  notably,"  says  Dr  Sterry  Hunt, 
"  the  various  minerals  and  earthy  compounds  like  those 
which  may  be  supposed  to  have  made  up  the  mass  of  the 
molten  globe,  the  case  is  entirely  different.  The  numerous 
and  detailed  experiments  of  St  Glair  Deville,  and  those  of 
Delesse,  besides  the  earlier  ones  of  Bischof,  unite  in  showing 
that  the  density  of  fused  rocks  is  much  less  than  that  of 
the  crystalline  products  resulting  from  their  slow  cooling, 
these  being,  according  to  Deville,  from  one-seventh  to  one- 
sixteenth  heavier  than  the  fused  mass,  so  that  if  formed  at 
the  surface  they  would,  in  obedience  to  the  laws  of  gravity, 
tend  to  sink  as  soon  as  formed."  * 

Nevertheless,  inasmuch  as  solidification  would  occur  at 
the  surface,  where  the  radiation  of  heat  would  take  place 
most  rapidly,  and  as  the  descending  solid  matter  would 
be  gradually  liquified,  it  seems  certain  that  for  a  long  time 
the  solid  portions  of  the  earth,  though  not  forming  a  solid 
crust,  would  occupy  the  exterior  parts  of  the  earth's  globe. 
After  a  time,  the  whole  globe  would  have  so  far  cooled 
that  a  process  of  aggregation  of  solid  matter  around  the 
centre  of  the  earth  would  take  place.  The  matter  so 
aggregated  consisted  probably  of  metallic  and  metalloidal 
compounds  denser  than  the  material  forming  the  crust  of 

*  It  is  as  yet  doubtful,  how  far  the  recent   experiments  of  Mallet 
affect  this  reasoning. 


1 8  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

the  earth.  Between  the  solid  centre  and  the  solidifying 
crust,  there  would  be  a  shell  of  uncongealed  matter, 
gradually  diminishing  in  amount,  but  a  portion  probably 
retaining  its  liquid  condition  even  to  the  present  time, 
whether  existing  in  isolated  reservoirs,  or  whether,  as 
Scrope  opines,  it  forms  still  a  continuous  sheet  surrounding 
the  solid  nucleus.  One  strange  fact  of  terrestrial  magnetism 
may  be  mentioned  in  partial  confirmation  of  the  theory 
that  the  interior  of  the  earth  is  of  this  nature, — a  great 
solid  mass,  separated  from  the  solid  crust  by  a  viscous 
plastic  ocean :  the  magnetic  poles  of  the  earth  are  chang- 
ing in  position  in  a  manner  which  seems  only  explicable 
on  the  supposition  that  there  is  an  interior  solid  globe 
rotating  under  the  outer  shell,  but  at  a  slightly  different 
rate,  gaming  or  losing  one  complete  rotation  in  the  course 
of  about  650  years. 

Be  this  as  it  may,  we  find  in  this  theory  an  explanation 
of  the  irregularities  of  the  earth's  surface.  The  solid  crust, 
contracting  at  first  more  rapidly  than  the  partially  liquid 
mass  within,  portions  of  this  liquid  matter  would  force 
their  way  through  and  form  glowing  oceans  outside  the 
crust.  Geology  tells  us  of  regions  which,  unless  so  formed, 
must  have  been  produced  in  the  much  more  startling 
manner  conceived  by  Meyer,  who  attributed  them  to  great 
meteoric  downfalls.*  At  a  later  stage,  when  the  crust, 

*  There  is  very  little  new  under  the  sun.  In  dealing  with  the 
multitudinous  lunar  craters,  which  were  certainly  formed  in  ages 
when  unattached  meteors  were  enormously  greater  in  number  and  size 
than  at  present,  I  mentioned  as  a  consideration  not  to  be  overlooked 
the  probability  that  some  of  the  meteoric  matter  falling  on  the  moon 


The  Past  and  Future  of  our  Earth.         19 

having  hitherto  cooled  more  rapidly  than  the  interior,  be- 
gan to  have  a  slower  rate  of  cooling,  the  retreating  nucleus 
left  the  crust  to  contract  upon  it,  corrugating  in  the  pro- 
cess, and  so  forming  the  first  mountain  ranges  upon  the 
spheroidal  earth,  which  preceding  processes  had  left 
partially  deformed  and  therefore  ready  to  become  in  due 
time  divided  into  oceans  and  continents. 

At  this  stage  the  earth  must  have  been  surrounded  by 
an  atmosphere  much  denser  than  that  now  existing,  and 
more  complex  in  constitution.  We  may  probably  form 
the  most  trustworthy  opinion  of  the  nature  of  the  earth's 
atmosphere  and  the  probable  condition  of  the  earth's 
surface  at  this  early  epoch  by  following  the  method  of 

when  she  was  plastic  with  intensity  of  heat  might  be  expected  to  leave 
traces  which  we  could  discern  ;  and  although  none  of  the  larger  lunar 
craters  could  be  so  formed,  yet  some  of  the  smaller  craters  in  these  lunar 
regions  where  craters  overlap  like  the  rings  left  by  raindrops  which 
have  fallen  on  a  plastic  surface,  might  be  due  to  meteoric  downfall.  I 
find  that  Meyer  had  far  earlier  advanced  a  similar  idea  in  explanation 
of  those  extensive  regions  of  our  earth  which  present  signs  of  having 
been  in  a  state  of  igneous  fluidity.  Again,  two  or  three  years  ago,  Sir 
W.  Thomson  startled  us  all  by  suggesting  the  possibility  that  vegetable 
life  might  have  been  introduced  upon  our  earth  by  the  downfall  of 
fragments  of  old  worlds.  Several  years  before,  Dr.  Sterry  Hunt  had 
pointed  to  evidence  which  tends  to  show  that  large  meteoric  globes 
had  fallen  on  the  earth,  and  he  shewed  further  that  some  meteors  contain 
hydrocarbons  and  certain  metallic  compounds  indicating  processes  of 
vegetation.  Dr.  Hunt  tells  me  that,  in  his  opinion,  some  of  the  meteors 
whose  fragments  have  fallen  on  the  earth  in  historic  times  were  once 
covered  with  vegetation,  since  otherwise,  according  to  our  present 
chemical  experience,  the  actual  condition  of  these  meteoric  fragments 
would  be  inexplicable.  He  does  not  regard  them  as  fragments  of  a 
considerable  orb  comparable  even  with  the  least  of  the  planets,  but  still, 
whatever  their  dimensions  may  have  been,  he  considers  that  vegetable 
life  must  have  formerly  existed  upon  them. 
2 


2O  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

reasoning  employed    by  Dr.    Sterry   Hunt.     It  will  be 
remembered  that  he  conceives  an  intense  heat  applied  to 
the  earth  as  at  present  existing,  and  infers  the  chemical 
results.     It  is  evident  that  such  a  process  would  result  in 
the  oxidation  of  every  form  of  carbonaceous  matter ;  all 
carbonates,  chlorides,  and  sulphates  would  be  converted 
into    silicates, — carbon,    chlorine,    and    sulphur    being 
separated  in  the  form  of  acid  gases.     These  gases,  with 
nitrogen,  an  excess  of  oxygen,  and  enormous  quantities  of 
aqueous  vapour,  would  form  an  atmosphere  of  great  density. 
In  such  an  atmosphere  condensation  would  only  take  place 
at  a  temperature  far  above  the  present  boiling  point ;  and 
the  lower  level   of  the   slowly  cooling  crust  would  be 
drenched  with  a  heated   solution   of  hydrochloric  acid, 
whose  decomposing  action,  aided  by  its  high  temperature, 
would  be  exceedingly  rapid.     The  primitive  igneous  rock 
on  which  these  heavy  showers  fell,  probably  resembled  in 
composition  certain  furnace-slags  or  basic  volcanic  glasses. 
Chlorides  of  the  various  bases  would  be  formed,  and  silica 
would  be  separated  under  the  decomposing  action  of  the 
heated  showers  until  the  affinities  of  the  hydrochloric  acid 
were  satisfied.     Later,  sulphuric  acid  would  be  formed  in 
large  quantities  by  the  combination  of  oxygen  with  the 
sulphurous  acid  of  the  primeval  atmosphere.     After  the 
compounds  of  sulphur  and  chlorine  had  been  separated 
from  the  air,  carbonic  acid  would  still  continue  to  be  an 
important  constituent  of  the  atmosphere.     This  constituent 
would  gradually  be  diminished  in   quantity,  during  the 
conversion    of    the    complex    aluminous    silicates    into 


The  Past  and  Future  of  our  Earth.         2 1 

hydrated  silicate  of  alumina,  or  clay,  while  the  separated 
lime,  magnesia,  and  alkalies  would  be  changed  into  bicar- 
bonates,  and  carried  down  to  the  sea  in  a  state  of 
solution. 

Thus  far  the  earth  was  without  life,  at  least  no  forms 
of  life,  vegetable  or  animal,  with  which  we  are  familiar, 
could  have  existed  while  the  processes  hitherto  described 
were  taking  place.  The  earth  during  the  long  series  of 
ages  required  for  these  changes,  was  in  a  condition  com- 
parable with  the  condition  through  which  Jupiter  and 
Saturn  are  apparently  at  present  passing.  A  dense 
atmosphere  concealed  the  surface  of  the  earth,  even  as  the 
true  surface  of  Jupiter  is  now  concealed.  Enormous 
cloud-masses  were  continually  forming  and  continually 
pouring  heavy  showers  on  the  intensely  heated  surface 
of  the  planet,  throughout  the  whole  of  the  enormous 
period  which  elapsed  between  the  time  when  first  the 
earth  had  a  surface,  and  the  time  when  the  atmosphere 
began  to  resemble  in  constitution  the  air  we  breathe. 
Even  when  vegetable  life,  such  as  we  are  familiar  with, 
was  first  possible,  the  earth  was  still  intensely  heated, 
and  the  quantity  of  aqueous  vapour  and  cloud  always 
present  in  the  air  must  have  been  far  greater  than  at 
present. 

It  has  been  in  vain,  thus  far,  that  men  have  attempted 
to  lift  the  veil  which  conceals  the  beginning  of  life  upon 
the  earth.  It  would  not  befit  me  to  express  an  opinion 
on  the  controversy  whether  the  possibility  of  spontaneous 
generation  has,  or  has  not,  been  experimentally  verified. 


22  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

That  is  a  question  on  which  experts  alone  can  give  an 
opinion  worth  listening  to  ;  and  all  that  can  here  be  noted 
is  that  experts  are  not  agreed  upon  the  subject.  As  a 
mere  speculation  it  may  be  suggested  that,  somewhat  as 
the  elements  when  freshly  released  from  chemical  com- 
bination show  for  a  short  time  an  unusual  readiness  to 
enter  into  new  combinations,  so  it  may  be  possible  that, 
when  the  earth  was  fresh  from  the  baptism  of  liquid  fire 
to  which  her  primeval  surface  had  for  ages  been  exposed, 
certain  of  the  substances  existing  on  her  surface  were  for 
the  time  in  a  condition  fitting  them  to  pass  to  a  higher 
order  of  existence,  and  that  then  the  lower  forms  of  life 
sprang  -  spontaneously  into  existence  on  the  earth's  still 
throbbing  bosom.  In  any  case,  we  need  not  feel  hampered 
by  religious  scruples  in  considering  the  possibility  of  the 
spontaneous  generation  of  life  upon  the  earth.  It  would 
be  straining  at  a  gnat  and  swallowing  a  camel,  if  we  found 
a  difficulty  of  that  sort  here,  after  admitting,  as  we  are 
compelled  by  clearest  evidence  to  admit,  the  evolution 
of  the  earth  itself  and  of  the  system  to  which  the  earth 
belongs,  by  purely  natural  processes.  The  student  of 
science  should  view  these  matters  apart  from  their  sup- 
posed association  with  religious  questions,  apart  in 
particular  from  interpretations  which  have  been  placed 
upon  the  Bible  records.  We  may  be  perfectly  satisfied 
that  the  works  of  God  will  teach  us  aright  if  rightly 
studied.  Eepeatedly  it  has  been  shown  that  ideas  respect- 
ing creation  which  had  come  to  be  regarded  as  sacred 
because  they  were  ancient,  were  altogether  erroneous, 


Tlie  Past  and  Future  of  our  Earth.         23 

and  it  may  well  be  so  in  this  matter  of  the  creation  of 
life.* 

Whatever  opinion  we  form  on  these  points,  it  seems 
probable  that  vegetable  life  existed  on  the  earth  before 
animal  life,  and  also  that  primeval  vegetation  was  far 
more  luxuriant  than  the  vegetation  of  our  own  time. 
Vast  forests  were  formed,  of  which  our  coal-fields, 
enormous  as  is  their  extent,  represent  merely  a  small 
portion  preserved  in  their  present  form  through  a 
fortuitous  combination  of  exceptional  conditions.  By  far 
the  greater  portion  of  those  forest  masses  underwent 
processes  of  vegetable  decay  effectually  removing  all 
traces  of  their  existence.  What  escaped,  however,  suffices 
to  show  the  amazing  luxuriance  with  which  vegetation 
formerly  throve  over  the  whole  earth. 

In  assuming  the  probability  that  vegetable  life  preceded 
animal  life,  I  may  appear  to  be  opposing  myself  to  an 
accepted  palseontological  doctrine,  according  to  which 
animal  and  vegetable  life  began  together  upon  the  earth. 
But  I  would  remind  you  that  the  actual  teaching  of  the 
ablest,  and  therefore  the  most  cautious,  palaeontologists  on 

*  It  is  not  for  me  to  undertake  to  reconcile  the  Bible  account  of 
creation  with  the  results  which  science  is  bringing  gradually  more 
clearly  before  us.  It  seems  to  me  unfortunate,  in  fact,  that  such 
reconciliation  should  be  thought  necessary.  Bat  it  must  be  conceded,  I 
suppose,  by  all,  that  it  is  not  more  difficult  to  reconcile  modern 
biological  theories  of  evolution  with  the  Bible  record,  than  it  is  to 
reconcile  with  that  record  the  theory  of  the  evolution  of  the  solar 
system.  Yet  strangely  enough  many  oppose  the  biological  theories 
(not  without  anger),  who  readily  admit  that  some  form  or  other  of 
the  nebular  hypothesis  of  the  solar  system  must  be  adopted  in  order 
to  explain  the  peculiarities  of  structure  presented  by  that  system. 


24  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

this  point,  amounts  merely  to  this,  that  if  the  geological 
record  as  at  present  known  be  assumed  to  be  coeval  with 
the  commencement  of  life  upon  the  globe,  then  animals 
and  plants  began  their  existence  together.  In  a  similar 
way  the  teachings  of  geology  and  palaeontology  as  to  the 
nature  of  the  earliest  known  forms  of  life  and  as  to  the 
succession  of  faunae  and  florae.,  depend  on  an  admittedly 
imperfect  record.  Apart,  however,  from  this  consideration, 
I  do  not  think  it  would  serve  any  useful  purpose  if  I  were 
to  attempt,  I  will  not  say  to  discuss,  for  that  is  out  of  the 
question,  but  to  speak  of  the  geological  evidence  respecting 
that  portion  of  the  past  history  of  our  earth  which  belongs 
to  the  interval  between  the  introduction  of  life  upon  the 
surface  and  the  present  time.  In  particular,  my  opinion 
on  the  interesting  question,  whether  all  the  forms  of  life 
upon  the  earth,  including  the  various  races  of  man,  came 
into  being  by  processes  of  evolution,  could  have  no  weight 
whatever.  I  may  remark  that,  even  apart  from  the 
evidence  which  the  most  eminent  biologists  have  brought 
to  bear  on  this  question,  it  seems  to  me  illogical  to  accept 
evolution  as  sufficient  to  explain  the  history  of  our  eartli 
during  millions  of  years  prior  to  the  existence  of  life,  and 
to  deny  its  sufficiency  to  explain  the  development  of  life 
(if  one  may  so  speak),  upon  the  earth.  It  seems  even 
more  illogical  to  admit  its  operation  up  to  any  given  stage 
in  the  development  of  life,  and  there  to  draw  a  hard  and 
fast  line  beyond  which  its  action  cannot  be  supposed  to 
have  extended.*  Nor  can  I  understand  why  it  should  be 

*  Since  I  thus  spoke,  a  new  and  as  it  seems  to  me  an  even  more 
illogical  limit  has  been  suggested  for  the  operation  of  the  process  of 


The  Past  and  Future  of  our  Earth.         25 

considered  a  comforting  thought,  that  at  this  or  that  epoch 
in  the  history  of  the  complex  machine  of  life,  some  imper- 
fection in  the  machinery  compelled  the  intervention  of 
God, — thus  presented  to  our  contemplation  as  Almighty, 
but  very  far  from  being  All-wise. 

There  is,  however,  one  aspect  in  which  the  existence  of 
life  has  to  be  considered  as  intimately  associated  with  the 
future  history  of  our  earth.  We  perceive  that  the 
abundance  of  primeval  vegetation  during  long  ages,  aided 
by  other  processes  tending  gradually  to  reduce  the  amount 
of  carbonic  acid  gas  in  the  air,  must  have  led  to  a  gradual 
change  in  the  constitution  of  the  atmosphere.  At  a 
later  epoch,  when  animal  life  and  vegetable  life  were  more 
equally  proportioned,  a  state  of  things  existed  which,  so 
far  as  can  be  judged,  might  have  lasted  many  times  as 
long  as  it  has  already  lasted  had  not  man  appeared  upon 
the  scene.  But  it  seems  to  me  impossible  to  consider 
what  is  actually  taking  place  on  the  earth  at  present, 
without  perceiving  that  within  periods,  short  indeed  by 
comparison  with  geological  eras,  and  still  shorter  compared 
with  the  intervals  to  which  the  astronomical  history  of 
our  earth  has  introduced  us,  the  condition  of  the  earth  as 
an  abode  of  life  will  be  seriously  modified  by  the  ways 
and  works  of  man.  It  is  only  in  the  savage  state  that  man 

evolution  as  affecting  the  development  of  life,  and  this  by  an  advocate 
of  the  general  doctrine  of  evolution.  I  refer  to  the  opinion  advanced 
by  Mr.  J.  Fiske,  of  Harvard  College  (U.S.),  "  that  no  race  of  organisms 
can  in  future  be  produced  through  the  agency  of  natural  selection  and 
direct  adaptation,  which  shall  be  zoologically  distinct  from,  and  superior 
to,  the  human  race." 


26  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

is  content  to  live  upon  the  produce  of  the  earth,  taking  his 
share,  as  it  were,  of  what  the  earth  (under  the  fruitful 
heat  of  the  sun,  which  is  her  life)  brings  forth, — day  by 
day,  month  by  month,  year  by  year,  and  century  by 
century.  But  civilized  man  is  not  content  to  take  his 
share  of  the  earth's  income,  he  uses  the  garnered  wealth 
which  is  the  earth's  capital — and  this  at  a  rate  which  is 
not  only  ever  increasing,  but  is  increasing  at  an  increasing 
rate.  The  rapid  consumption  of  coal  is  but  a  single 
instance  of  his  wasteful  expenditure  of  the  stores  which 
during  countless  ages  have  been  gathered  together, 
seemingly  for  the  use  of  man.  In  this  country  (America), 
I  need  not  dwell  upon  the  fact  that,  in  many  other  ways, 
man  is  consuming,  if  not  wasting,  supplies  of  earth-wealth 
which  cannot  be  replaced.  It  is  not  merely  what  is  found 
within  the  earth,  but  the  store  of  wealth  which  clothes 
the  earth's  surface,  which  is  thus  being  exhausted. 
Your  mighty  forests  seem  capable  of  supplying  all  the 
timber  that  the  whole  race  of  man  could  need  for  ages ; 
yet  a  very  moderate  computation  of  the  rate  at  which 
they  are  being  cut  down,  and  will  presumably  continue  to 
be,  by  a  population  increasing  rapidly  in  numbers  and  in 
the  destructive  capabilities  which  characterize  modern 
civilization,  would  show  that  America  will  be  denuded 
of  its  forest-wealth  in  about  the  same  period  which  we  in 
England  have  calculated  as  probably  limiting  the  effective 
duration  of  our  stores  of  coal.  That  period — a  thousand 
or  twelve  hundred  years — may  seem  long  compared  with 
the  life  of  individual  men,  long  even  compared  with  the 


The  Past  and  Future  of  our  Earth.        27 

duration  of  any  nation  in  the  height  of  power ;  but 
though  men  and  nations  pass  away  the  human  race 
continues,  and  a  thousand  years  are  as  less  than  a  day 
in  the  history  of  that  race.  Looking  forward  to  that 
future  day,  seemingly  so  remote,  but  (on  the  scale  upon 
which  we  are  at  present  tracing  our  earth's  history)  in 
reality  the  to-morrow  of  our  earth,  we  see  that  either  a 
change  in  their  mode  of  civilization  will  be  forced  on  the 
human  race,,  or  else  it  will  then  have  become  possible,  as 
your  Ericsson  has  already  suggested,  to  make  the  sun's 
daily  heat  the  mainspring  of  the  machinery  of  civilization. 

But  turning  from  those  portions  of  the  past  and  future 
of  our  earth  which,  by  comparison  with  the  astronomical 
eras  of  her  history,  may  be  regarded  as  present,  let  us 
consider,  so  far  as  known  facts  permit,  the  probable 
future  of  the  earth  after  astronomical  eras  comparable  with 
those  which  were  presented  to  us  when  we  consider  her 
past  history. 

One  of  the  chief  points  in  the  progression  of  the  earth 
towards  her  present  condition  was  the  gradual  passing 
away  of  the  heat  with  which  formerly  her  whole  globe  was 
instinct.  We  have  now  to  consider  whether  this  process 
of  cooling  is  still  going  on,  and  how  far  it  is  likely  to 
extend.  In  this  inquiry  we  must  not  be  misled  by  the 
probable  fact,  for  such  it  seems,  that  during  hundreds  of 
thousands  of  years  the  general  warmth  of  the  surface  of  the 
earth  has  not  appreciably  diminished.  In  the  first  place, 
hundreds  of  thousands  of  years  are  the  seconds  of  the  time- 
measures  we  have  now  to  deal  with  ;  and  next,  it  is  known 


28  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

that  the  loss  of  temperature  which  our  earth  is  at  present 
under-going  chiefly  affects  the  interior  parts  of  her  globe. 
The  inquiries  of  Mallet  and  others  show  that  the  present 
vulcanian  energies  of  the  earth  are  due  in  the  main  to 
the  gradual  withdrawal  of  the  earth's  nuclear  parts  from 
the  surface  crust,  because  of  the  relatively  more  rapid  loss 
of  heat  by  the  former.  The  surface  crust  is  thus  left  to 
contract  under  the  action  of  gravity,  and  vulcanian  pheno- 
mena— that  is,  volcanoes  and  earthquakes, — represent  the 
mechanical  equivalent  of  this  contraction.  Here  is  a 
process  which  cannot  continue  for  ever,  simply  because  it 
is  in  its  very  nature  exhaustive  of  the  energy  to  which  it 
is  due.  It  shows  us  that  the  earth's  nuclear  regions  are 
parting  with  their  heat,  and  as  they  cannot  part  with  their 
heat  without  warming  the  surface-crust,  which  nevertheless 
grows  no  warmer,  we  perceive  that  the  surface-heat  is 
maintained  from  a  source  which  is  being  gradually 
exhausted.  The  fitness  of  the  earth  to  be  the  abode  of 
life  will  not  only  be  affected  directly  in  this  way,  but  will 
be  indirectly  affected  by  the  loss  of  that  vulcanian  energy 
which  appears  to  be  one  of  its  necessary  conditions.  At 
present,  the  surface  of  the  earth  is  like  the  flesh  clothing 
the  living  body ;  it  does  not  wear  out  because  (through 
the  life  which  is  within  it)  it  undergoes  continual  change. 
But  even  as  the  body  itself  is  consumed  by  natural 
processes  so  soon  as  life  has  passed  from  it,  so,  when  the 
internal  heat  of  the  earth,  which  is  its  life,  shall  have 
passed  away,  her  surface  will  "grow  old  as  doth  a 
garment ; "  and  with  this  inherent  terrestrial  vitality  will 


The  Past  and  Futttre  of  our  Earth.        29 

pass  away  by  slow  degrees  the  life  which  is  upon  the 
earth. 

In  dealing  with  the  past  history  of  our  earth,  we  recog- 
nized a  time  when  she  was  a  sun,  rejoicing  as  a  giant  in  the 
strength  of  youth  ;  and  later  we  considered  a  time  when 
her  condition  resembled  that  of  the  planets  Jupiter  and 
Saturn,  whose  dense  atmospheres  seem  to  be  still  loaded 
with  the  waters  which  are  to  form  the  future  oceans  of 
those  noble  orbs.  In  considering  our  earth's  future,  we 
may  recognize  in  the  moon's  actual  condition  a  stage 
through  which  the  earth  will  hereafter  have  to  pass. 
When  the  earth's  inherent  heat  has  passed  away  and 
long  ages  have  elapsed  since  she  had  been  the  abode 
of  life,  we  may  believe  that  her  desert  continents  and 
frost-bound  oceans  will  in  some  degree  resemble  the  arid 
wastes  which  the  astronomer  recognizes  in  the  lunar 
surface.  And  yet  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  the 
appearance  of  the  earth  will  ever  be  closely  similar  to  that 
presented  by  the  moon.  The  earth  may  part,  as 
completely  as  the  moon  has,  with  her  internal  heat ;  the 
rotation  of  the  earth  may  in  hundreds  of  millions  of  years 
be  slowed  down  by  tidal  action  into  agreement  with  the 
period  in  which  the  moon  completes  her  monthly  orbit ; 
and  every  form  of  animal  and  vegetable  life  may  perish 
from  off  the  face  of  the  earth :  yet  ineffaceable  traces  of 
the  long  ages  during  which  her  surface  was  clothed  with 
life  and  instinct  with  inherent  vitality,  will  distinguish 
her  from  the  moon,  where  the  era  of  life  was  incomparably 
shorter.  Even  if  the  speculations  of  Stanislas  Meunier  be 


30  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

just,  according  to  which  the  oceans  will  gradually  be  with- 
drawn beneath  the  surface  crust  and  even  the  atmosphere 
almost  wholly  disappear,  there  would  for  ever  remain  the 
signs  of  changes  brought  about  by  rainfall  and  snowfall, 
by  wind  and  storm,  by  river  and  glacier,  by  ocean  waves 
and  ocean  currents,  by  the  presence  of  vegetable  life  and 
of  animal  life  during  hundreds  of  millions  of  years,  and 
even  more  potently  by  the  fiery  deluge  poured  continually 
on  the  primeval  surface  of  our  globe.  By  all  these  causes 
the  surface  of  the  earth  has  been  so  wrought  upon  as  no 
longer  to  resemble  the  primary  igneous  rock  which  we 
seem  to  recognize  in  the  scarred  surface  of  our  satellite. 

Dare  we  look  onwards  to  yet  later  stages  in  the  history 
of  our  earth  ?  Truly  it  is  like  looking  beyond  death  ;  for 
now  imagination  presents  our  earth  to  us  as  an  inert  mass, 
not  only  lifeless  as  at  the  beginning,  but  no  longer 
possessing  that  potentiality  of  life  which  existed  in  her 
substance  before  life  appeared  upon  her  surface.  We 
trace  her  circling  year  after  year  around  the  sun,  serving 
no  useful  purpose  according  to  our  conceptions.  The 
energy  represented  by  her  motions  of  rotation  and  revolu- 
tion seems  to  be  as  completely  wasted  as  are  those  parts 
(the  whole  save  only  one  230,000,000th  portion)  of  the 
sun's  light  and  heat,  which,  falling  on  no  planet,  seem  to 
be  poured  uselessly  into  desert  space.  Long  as  has  been, 
and  doubtless  will  be,  the  duration  of  life  upon  the  earth, 
it  seems  less  than  a  second  of  time  compared  with  those 
two  awful  time-intervals — one  past,  when  as  yet  life  had 
not  begun,  the  other  still  to  come,  when  all  life  shall  have 
passed  away. 


The  Past  and  Future  of  our  Earth.        3 1 

But  we  are  thus  led  to  contemplate  time-intervals 
of  a  yet  higher  order — to  consider  the  eras  belonging  to 
the  life-time  of  the  solar  system  itself.  Long  after 
the  earth  shall  have  ceased  to  be  the  abode  of  life 
other  and  nobler  orbs  will  become  in  their  time  fit  to 
support  millions  of  forms  as  well  of  animal  as  of  vege- 
table existence ;  and  the  later  each  planet  is  in  thus 
"  putting  on  life,"  the  longer  will  be  the  duration  of  the 
life-supporting  era  of  its  own  existence.  Even  those  time- 
intervals  will  pass,  however,  until  every  orb  in  turn  has 
been  the  scene  of  busy  life,  and  has  then,  each  after  its  due 
life-season,  become  inert  and  dead.  One  orb  alone  will 
then  remain,  on  which  life  will  be  possible, — the  sun,  the 
source  whence  life  had  been  sustained  in  all  those  worlds. 
And  then,  after  the  lapse,  perchance,  of  a  lifeless  interval, 
compared  with  which  all  the  past  eras  of  the  solar  system 
were  utterly  insignificant,  the  time  will  arrive  when  the 
sun  will  be  a  fit  abode  for  living  creatures.  Thereafter, 
during  ages  infinite  to  our  conceptions,  the  great  central 
orb  will  be  (as  now,  though  in  another  sense)  the  life  of 
the  solar  system.  We  may  even  look  onwards  to  still 
more  distant  changes,  seeing  that  the  solar  system  is  itself 
moving  on  an  orbit,  though  the  centre  round  which  it 
travels  is  so  distant  that  as  yet  it  remains  unknown. .  We 
see  in  imagination  change  after  change,  cycle  after  cycle, 

tai 

Drawn  on  paths  of  never-ending  duty, 

The  worlds — eternity  begun — 
Best,  absorbed  in  ever  glorious  beauty 

On  the  Heart  of  the  All- Central  Sun. 


32  Oiir  Place  among  Infinities. 

But  in  reality  it  is  only  because  our  conceptions  are 
finite  that  we  thus  look  forward  to  an  end  even  as  we  seek 
to  trace  events  back  to  a  beginning.  The  notion  is  incon- 
ceivable to  us  that  absolutely  endless  series  of  change 
may  take  place  in  the  future  and  have  taken  place  in  the 
past ;  equally  inconceivable  is  the  notion  that  series  on 
series  of  material  combinations,  passing  onwards  to  ever 
higher  orders, — from  planets  to  suns,  from  suns  to  sun- 
systems,  from  sun-systems  to  galaxies,  from  galaxies  to 
systems  of  galaxies,  from  these  to  higher  and  higher  orders, 
absolutely  without  end, — may  surround  us  on  every  hand. 
And  yet,  as  I  set  out  by  saying,  these  things  are  not  more 
inconceivable  than  infinity  of  time  and  infinity  of  space, 
while  the  idea  that  time  and  space  are  finite  is  not  merely 
inconceivable  but  opposed  directly  to  what  the  mind 
conceives  of  space  and  time.  It  has  been  said  that 
progression  necessarily  implies  a  beginning  and  an  end ; 
but  this  is  not  so  where  the  progression  relates  to  absolute 
space  or  time.  No  one  can  indeed  doubt  that  progression 
in  space  is  of  its  very  nature  limitless.  But  this  is 
equally  true,  though  not  less  inconceivable,  of  time. 
Progression  implies  only  relative  beginning  and  relative 
ending ;  but  that  there  should  be  an  absolute  beginning 
or  an  absolute  end  is  not  merely  inconceivable,  like 
absolute  eternity,  but  is  inconsistent  with  the  necessary- 
conditions  of  the  progression  of  time  as  presented  to  us  by 
our  conceptions.  Those  who  can  may  find  relief  in  believ- 
ing in  absolutely  void  space  and  absolutely  unoccupied  time 
before  some  very  remote  but  not  infinitely  remote  epoch, 


The  Past  and  Future  of  our  Earth.        33 

which  may  in  such  belief  be  called  the  beginning  of  all 
things ;  but  the  void  time  before  that  beginning  can  have 
had  no  beginning,  unless  it  were  preceded  by  time  not 
unoccupied  by  events,  which  is  inconsistent  with  the 
supposition.  We  find  no  absolute  beginning  if  we  look 
backwards ;  and  looking  forwards  we  not  only  find  an 
absolute  end  inconceivable  by  reason,  but  revealed  religion 
— as  ordinarily  interpreted — teaches — that  on  that  side 
lies  an  eternity  not  of  void  but  of  occupied  time.  The 
time-intervals,  then,  which  have  presented  themselves  to 
our  contemplation  in  dealing  with  the  past  and  future  of 
our  earth,  being  in  their  nature  finite,  however  vast,  are 
less  than  the  shortest  instant  in  comparison  with  absolute 
time,  which — endless  itself — is  measured  by  endless  cycles 
of  change.  And  in  like  manner,  the  space  seemingly 
infinite  from  which  our  solar  system  has  drawn  its 
materials — in  other  words,  the  universe  as  partially 
revealed  to  us  in  the  study  of  the  star-depths — is  but  the 
merest  point  by  comparison  with  absolute  space.  The  end, 
seemingly  so  remote,  to  which  our  earth  is  tending,  the  end 
infinitely  more  remote  to  which  the  solar  system  is  tending, 
the  end  of  our  galaxy,  the  end  of  systems  of  such  galaxies 
as  ours — all  these  endings  (each  one  of  which  presents 
itself  in  turn  to  our  conceptions  as  the  end  of  the  universe 
itself)  are  but  the  beginnings  of  eras  comparable  with 
themselves,  even  as  the  beginnings  to  which  we  severally 
trace  back  the  history  of  our  planet,  of  the  planetary 
system,  and  of  galaxies  of  such  systems,  are  but  the  end- 
ings of  prior  conditions  which  have  followed  each  other  in 


34  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

infinite  succession.  The  wave  of  life  which  is  now  passing 
over  our  earth  is  but  a  ripple  in  the  sea  of  life  within  the 
solar  system  ;  this  sea  of  life  is  itself  but  as  a  wavelet  on 
the  ocean  of  eternal  life  throughout  the  universe.  Incon- 
ceivable, doubtless,  are  these  infinities  of  time  and  space, 
of  matter,  of  motion,  and  of  life.  Inconceivable  that  the 
whole  universe  can  be  for  all  time  the  scene  of  the 
operation  of  infinite  personal  power,  omnipresent,  all- 
knowing.  Utterly  incomprehensible  how  Infinite  Purpose 
can  be  associated  with  endless  material  evolution.  But  it 
is  no  new  thought,  no  modern  discovery,  that  we  are  thus 
utterly  powerless  to  conceive  or  comprehend  the  idea  of 
an  Infinite  Being,  Almighty,  All-knowing,  Omnipresent, 
and  Eternal,  of  whose  inscrutable  purpose  the  material 
universe  is  the  unexplained  manifestation.  Science  is  in 
presence  of  the  old,  old  mystery ;  the  old,  old  questions 
are  asked  of  her, — "  Canst  thou  by  searching  find  out 
God  ?  canst  thou  find  out  the  Almighty  unto  perfection  ? 
It  is  as  high  as  heaven  ;  what  canst  thou  do  ?  deeper  than 
hell;  what  canst  thou  know?"  And  science  answers 
these  questions,  as  they  were  answered  of  old, — "As 
touching  the  Almighty,  we  cannot  find  Him  out." 


OF  SEEMING-  WASTES  IN  NATUEE. 

IT  was  formerly  the  custom  to  regard  the  study  of  science 
as  calculated  to  present  to  us  in  a  way  which  all  could 
understand,  the  wisdom  and  benevolence  of  that  God  in 
whom  we  believe.  So  thoroughly  was  this  accepted,  that 
we  find  many  students  of  science  adopting,  almost  as  a 
scientific  principle — at  any  rate,  as  an  incontrovertible 
axiom — this  supposed  fact.  If  a  choice  lay  between  two 
explanations  of  any  observed  relations,  and  one  explana- 
tion seemed  to  accord  well,  while  the  other  seemed  to 
accord  ill,  with  conceptions  commonly  entertained  re- 
specting the  ways  of  God,  the  former  explanation  was 
accepted,  even  though  the  balance  of  evidence  might  be 
in  favour  of  the  latter. 

This  was  true  of  all  departments  of  science ;  but  perhaps 
the  application  of  the  principle  was  more  remarkable  in 
the  case  of  astronomy  than  in  that  of  any  other  subject. 
It  was  first  taken  for  granted  that  the  celestial  orbs  were 
intended  for  the  support  of  life ;  and  then  that,  to  this  end, 
they  must  all  be  at  all  times  inhabited.  We  find  even  the 
observant  Herschel  so  adapting  observed  facts  respecting 
the  constitution  of  the  sun  to  the  idea  that  the  sun's  great 
mass  was  intended  to  be  the  abode  of  life,  as  to  lose  sight 


36  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

of  evidence  which,  even  in  his  day,  was  all  but  over- 
whelming against  the  theory  of  the  sun's  habitability. 
Brewster,  in  like  manner,  was  misled  by  similar  considera- 
tions in  such  sort  as  to  overlook  circumstances  which  he 
would  scarcely  otherwise  have  omitted  to  notice.  For 
example,  regarding  the  noble  orb  of  Jupiter,  the  mighty 
sweep  of  its  orbit,  and  the  symmetrical  scheme  of  bodies 
circling  round  the  planet,  Brewster  inferred  that  Jupiter  was 
certainly  intended  to  be  the  abode  of  life  ;  and  forthwith, 
in  his  zeal  to  show  the  fitness  of  the  planet  for  the  purpose, 
he  neglected  to  consider  the  circumstances  unfavourable 
to  the  theory,  the  reduced  supply  of  heat  from  the  sun  at 
Jupiter's  great  distance,  the  small  density  of  the  planet,  the 
deep  atmosphere  enveloping  it,  and  the  signs  of  disturb- 
ances indicating  an  intense  heat  in  the  planet's  mass. 
Nay  more  :  still  with  the  excellent  purpose  of  indicating 
the  beneficent  supervision  exerted  by  the  Almighty  to 
provide  for  the  giant  planet  of  the  solar  system,  Brewster 
dwelt  upon  the  arrangement  made  to  supply  Jupiter  with 
reflected  light  from  the  four  satellites  which  circle  around 
him,  failing  to  notice  that  all  these  moons,  if  full  at  the 
same  time  (which  they  can  never  be),  would  not  supply 
Jupiter  with  one  sixteenth  part  of  the  light  which  we 
receive  from  our  single  moon  when  she  is  full.*  And 
many  other  similar  cases  might  be  cited  from  the  pages  of 
Brewster,  Chalmers,  Dick,  and  others  who  have  advocated 
the  fascinating  theory  that  all  the  orbs  of  heaven  exist 
either  as  the  abodes  of  life,  or  to  support  life  in  other  worlds. 
*  '  Expanse  of  Heaven, '  pp.  86,  et  seq. 


Of  Seeming  Wastes  in  Nature.  37 

Now,  there  can  be  no  question  that  it  is  a  just  and 
excellent  view  of  the  wonders  which  the  study  of  science 
brings  continually  before  us,  to  regard  them  all  as  symbols 
of  the  might  and  wisdom  of  God.  Nor  can  there  be  any 
objection  to  the  consideration  of  any  special  object  as 
illustrating  the  benevolence  of  the  Creator  towards  His 
creatures,  so  only  that  the  object  be  judiciously  selected, 
and  the  evidence  of  the  useful  purposes  subserved  by  it 
be  clear  and  unmistakable.  But  it  appears  to  me  that 
great  mischief  may  be  done,  that  in  fact  great  mischief  has 
often  been  done,  by  the  too  frequent  attempt  to  refer  all 
things  to  some  special  design  in  the  interests  of  such  and 
such  creatures.  The  reader  of  works  in  which  such 
attempts  are  made  is  apt  to  regard  these  special  indications 
of  divine  economy  (so  to  speak)  as  forming  a  necessary 
part  of  the  evidence  on  which  he  is  to  base  his  belief  in 
the  wisdom  and  benevolence  of  God,  and  accordingly  to 
lose  faith  to  some  degree,  if  he  come  to  learn  that  the 
special  purpose  supposed  to  be  fulfilled  is  not  in  reality 
fulfilled,  that  the  seeming  display  of  care  for  the  wants 
of  certain  creatures  must  be  otherwise  interpreted. 

It  appears  to  me,  therefore,  most  desirable  that  in 
studying  the  wonders  of  nature,  we  should  view  facts  as 
they  are — not  in  an  artificial  light,  however  excellent  the 
source  of  that  light  may  be.  We  may  believe,  with  all 
confidence,  that  could  we  but  understand  the  whole  of 
what  we  find  around  us,  the  wisdom  with  which  each  part 
has  been  designed  would  be  manifest ;  but  we  must  not 
fall  into  the  mistake  of  supposing  that  we  can  so  clearly 


38  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

understand  all  as  to  be  able  to  recognise  the  purpose  of  this 
or  that  arrangement,  the  wisdom  of  this  or  that  provision. 
Nor,  if  any  results  revealed  by  scientific  research  appear 
to  us  to  accord  ill  with  our  conceptions  of  the  economy  of 
nature,  should  we  be  troubled,  on  the  one  hand,  as  respects 
our  faith  in  God's  benevolence,  or  doubt,  on  the  other, 
the  manifest  teachings  of  science.  In  a  word,  our  faith 
must  not  be  hampered  by  scientific  doubts,  our  science 
must  not  be  hampered  by  religious  scruples. 

It  is  very  necessary  in  this  age  of  great  scientific  dis- 
coveries to  bear  this  rule  in  mind.  Again  and  again  it 
has  been  proved,  as  science  has  advanced,  that  the  inter- 
pretation of  observed  facts  by  those  who  viewed  science 
specially  with  reference  to  religious  teachings,  had  been 
erroneous,  and  again  and  again  the  mischief  thus  tem- 
porarily wrought  has  been  remedied  after  a  longer  or 
shorter  interval  of  suspense.  But  now  that  science  is 
making  more  rapid  strides  than  of  yore,  the  mischief  pro- 
duced by  over-hasty  attempts  to  interpret  science  in  a 
manner  favourable  to  preconceived  ideas  is  likely  to  be 
wider  and  more  enduring.  I  conceive,  then,  that  nothing 
can  be  clearer  than  the  inference  to  which  past  experience 
should  lead  us.  Since  formerly  mistakes  have  been  made, 
and  mischief,  more  or  less  extensive,  has  been  wrought  by 
the  practice  to  which  I  refer,  while  little  good  has  ever 
resulted,  even  temporarily,  from  it,  the  time  has  arrived 
for  adopting  a  better  course.  We  need  not  suppose  for  a 
moment  that  science  is  irreconcilable, — I  will  not  say 
with  religion,  but  with  ideas — even  such  as  we  might  con- 


Of  Seeming  Wastes  in  Nature.  39 

ceive — of  the  wisdom  and  benevolence  of  God  ;  we  need 
not  doubt  that,  if  we  could  understand  the  whole  scheme 
of  the  Almighty,  it  would  appear  most  beautiful,  and  all 
its  parts  perfectly  adapted  to  His  purposes ;  the  believer 
may  still  say  to  the  unbeliever — 

'  All  nature  is  but  art  unknown  to  thee  ; 
All  chance,  direction,  which  thou  canst  not  see  ; 
All  discord  harmony  not  understood  ; 
All  partial  evil  universal  good.' 

But  we  must  remember  that  the  believer  also  cannot 
expect  to  be  able  to  interpret  all  that  science  reveals.  And 
recognizing  this,  we  should,  as  I  think,  study  science  with 
singleness  of  purpose,  not  seeking  on  the  one  hand  for 
evidence  of  design  whereby  to  discomfit  those  from  whom 
we  differ,  nor  fearing,  on  the  other  hand,  that  our  faith 
will  be  shaken  by  discoveries  not  according  altogether  with 
the  ideas  we  had  formed  as  to  the  Almighty's  mode  of 
dealing  with  his  universe. 

Such  considerations  as  these  are  specially  to  be  borne 
in  mind  in  dealing  with  the  apparent  waste  of  power  and 
material  frequently  observable  in  Nature's  operations.  It 
is  not  desirable,  on  the  one  hand,  to  close  our  eyes  to  these 
seeming  instances  of  waste,  while  it  is  equally  undesirable 
to  adopt  the  opinion  that  there  is  necessarily  a  real  waste ; 
the  proper  course,  then,  would  appear  clearly  to  be,  that, 
while  recognising  the  seemingly  exuberant  display  of 
energy  in  Nature,  we  should  be  content  to  believe,  though 
at  present  we  may  be  quite  unable  to  prove,  that  the 
waste  is  apparent  only,  not  real,  and  to  admit  that  we  see 


40  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

too  small  a  part  of  the  scheme  of  the  Creator  to  pronounce 
an  opinion  on  the  economy  or  wisdom  of  the  observed 
arrangements. 

Although  astronomy,  bringing  us  as  it  does  in  presence 
of  the  infinities  of  space,  and  indicating  the  operations  of 
an  infinity  of  force  acting  during  infinite  time,  is  of  all 
others  the  science  which  seems  to  present  to  us  the  most 
striking  instances  of  waste  in  nature,  it  would  yet  be  easy 
to  cite  many  instances  of  seeming  waste  without  leaving 
the  teachings  of  our  earth.  How  many  seeds  are  scattered 
over  the  face  of  the  earth  to  no  visible  purpose,  for  each 
one  that  falls  on  good  ground  and  grows  to  perfec- 
tion ?  How  many  creatures  are  brought  to  life  that  perish 
before  they  reach  maturity?  This,  true  of  all  races  of 
animals,  is  true  of  man.  True  of  the  individual  man,  it  is 
also  true  of  nations,  of  races  of  men.  History  shows  us, 
and  we  see  in  our  own  day,  whole  tribes  of  men  disappear- 
ing without  having  reached  that  degree  of  civilization 
which  we  may  regard  as  the  measure  of  maturity  in  races 
and  nations. 

If  we  look  back  at  the  history  of  our  earth  before  man 
appeared,  we  find  even  more  abundant  evidence  of  seem- 
ing waste,  and,  in  particular,  if  we  adopt  that  favourite 
view. of  many,  according  to  which  the  recognition  of  the 
Almighty's  power  in  the  heavens  is  regarded  as  one  of  the 
chief  ends  for  which  the  celestial  orbs  were  made,  how 
strange  seems  the  thought  that  for  ages  on  ages  all  the 
wonders  of  the  heavens  were  displayed  with  none  on  the 
earth  to  recognise  their  meaning.  The  sun  showed  his 


Of  Seeming  Wastes  in  Nature.  41 

glories  in  the  skies  day  after  day,  the  moon  shed  her  silver 
light  on  the  ocean,  the  planets  traversed  their  devious 
ways  amongst  the  stars,  and  the  constellations  shone  in 
fill  their  splendour,  while  not  a  creature  existed  on  the 
earth  which  could  appreciate  the  glorious  display  or 
reason  respecting  its  significance. 

Passing  still  farther  back  we  reach  a  time  when  the 
whole  mass  of  the  earth  appears  to  us  as  a  mere  waste. 
It  is  scarcely  open  to  question  that,  for  millions  of  years 
before  life  existed  on  the  earth,  the  whole  of  the  terrestial 
globe  was  in  a  state  of  intense  heat,  was  the  scene  of  pro- 
cesses of  tremendous  activity,  but  was  utterly  unfit  to  bo 
the  abode  of  any  kind  of  life. 

Nor  is  it  in  the  past  only,  of  which  records  remain  to  us, 
which  science  can  interpret,  but  in  the  future  also,  which 
science  reveals  to  us  scarcely  less  clearly  through  processes 
of  inference,  that  this  seeming  waste  is  recognised.  When 
we  look  forward  to  the  future  of  this  earth  on  which  we 
live,  we  find,  far  off  it  may  be,  but  still  discernible,  a  time 
when  all  life  will  have  perished  from  off  the  earth's  face. 
Then  will  she  circle  around  the  central  sun,  even  as  our 
moon  circles,  a  dead  though  massive  globe,  an  orb  bearing 
only  the  records  and  the  memories  of  former  life,  but,  to 
our  conceptions,  a  useless  desert  scene. 

So  might  we  study  the  lessons  presented  by  our  earth, 
her  present  condition,  her  past  history,  her  future  fate, 
still  finding  fresh  evidence  of  the  seeming  waste  of  nature's 
powers,  and  of  that  which  we  call  time,  as  well  as  of  the 
material  substance  in  and  through  which  nature  works, 


42  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

throughout  all  time.  Hereafter  I  propose  to  discuss  such 
considerations,  and  to  apply  them  to  another  purpose. 
But  I  wish  now  to  turn  from  the  earth  to  consider  how 
the  heavens  present  to  us  instances,  altogether  more 
striking,  of  apparent  waste  in  nature. 

Take,  first,  the  sun — that  orb  whence  all  the  supplies 
of  force  and  energy  known  to  us  on  earth  may  truly  be 
said  to  be  derived.  What  can  seem  clearer,  at  a  first 
view,  than  that  the  sun  is  set  at  the  centre  of  the  solar 
system  to  supply  light  and  heat  to  the  worlds  constituting 
that  system?  So  viewing  him,  and  remembering  the 
wonderful  processes  taking  place  within  his  globe,  and 
the  marvellous  manner  in  which  the  fires  of  the  great 
central  furnace  are  sustained,  we  justly  regard  the  sun  as 
a  fitting  subject  for  our  admiring  contemplation.  But  yet, 
so  soon  as  we  inquire  into  the  adaptation  of  the  sun's  powers 
to  the  work  which  we  have  regarded  as  specially  assigned 
to  him,  we  recognise  a  mystery  of  mysteries  in  the  seem- 
ing waste  of  his  gigantic  energies.  Our  earth  receives  less 
than  the  2000  millionth  part  of  the  heat  and  light  emitted 
by  the  sun ;  all  the  planets  together  receive  less  than 
the  230  millionth  part ;  the  rest  is  seemingly  scattered 
uselessly  through  the  interstellar  depths.  To  other  worlds, 
circling  around  other  suns,  our  sun  may  indeed  appear  as 
a  star ;  but  how  minute  the  quantity  of  light  and  heat  so 
received  from  him  compared  with  the  enormous  quantity 
apparently  wasted.  The  portion  which  seems  squandered 
is  scarcely  affected  at  all  by  such  small  uses ;  and  that 
portion  is  more  than  230  millions  of  times  as  great  as  the 


Of  Seeming  Wastes  in  Nature.  43 

portion  used  to  warn  and  to  illuminate  the  solar  system. 
And  then  consider  what  is  the  actual  amount  of  energy 
thus  seemingly  wasted.  I  have  computed  (adopting  Sir 
J.  Herschel's  estimate  of  the  amount  of  heat  poured  by 
the  sun  upon  each  square  mile  of  the  earth's  surface)  that 
the  sun  emits  in  each  second  as  much  heat  as  would  result 
from  the  burning  of  11,600,000,000,000,000  tons  of  coal, 
and  of  this  enormous  amount  of  energy  the  portion  utilized 
(that  is,  the  heat  received  by  the  various  members  of  the 
solar  system)  corresponds  only  to  that  due  to  the  con- 
sumption of  about  50  millions  of  tons — only  fifty  millions 
out  of  11,600  millions  of  millions. 

And  now,  remembering  that  what  is  true  of  the  sun  is 
true  of  his  fellow-suns,  the  stars,  that  all  the  thousands  of 
star?  we  see,  all  the  millions  revealed  by  the  telescope,  as 
well  as  many  myriads  of  times  as  many  more  that  lie 
beyond  the  range  of  our  most  powerful  telescopes,  are  suns 
similarly  pouring  heat  and  light  into  space,  how  enormous, 
according  to  our  conceptions,  is  the  waste  of  energy.  The 
force  wasted  is,  in  fact,  very  nearly  the  whole  of  the  in- 
conceivable amount  expended. 

How,  then,  are  we  to  view  the  startling  fact  thus  brought 
before  us  1  Must  we  admit  that  so  much  of  the  Creator's 
work  is  vain  in  truth  as  in  appearance  1  or,  on  the  other 
hand,  must  we  reject  the  evidence  of  science?  As  it 
seems  to  me,  we  need  do  neither  one  nor  the  other.  We 
have  before  iis  a  great  mystery  ;  but  it  is  not  a  new  thing 
to  find  the  ways  of  God  unsearchable  by  man.  Our  faith 

in  the  wisdom  of  God  need  not  be  shaken  unless  we 
3 


44  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

assume  that  our  science  teaches  us  the  whole  of  that  which 
is.  But  inasmuch  as  science  itself  has  taught  us  over  and 
over  again  how  little  we  really  know,  how  little  we  can 
know,  I  think  that  we  may  very  well  believe  in  this 
instance  that  the  seeming  mystery  arises  from  the  imper- 
fectness  of  our  knowledge.  If  we  could  see  the  whole 
plan  of  the  Creator,  instead  of  the  minutest  portion ;  if  we 
could  scan  the  whole  of  space,  instead  of  the  merest  corner; 
if  all  time  were  before  us,  instead  of  a  span,  we  might  pro- 
nounce judgment.  As  it  is,  what,  after  all,  has  science 
taught  us  but  what  we  had  already  learned?  'The  judg- 
ments of  God  are  unsearchable,  and  His  ways  past  finding 
out.' 


A  NEW  THEORY  OF  LIFE  IN  OTHER  WORLDS. 

Two  opposite  views  have  been  entertained  respecting  life 
in  other  worlds.  One  is  the  theory  which  Brewster  some- 
what strangely  described  as  the  creed  of  the  philosopher 
and  the  hope  of  the  Christian,  that  nearly  all  the  orbs 
which  people  space  are  the  abode  of  life.  Brewster, 
Chalmers,  Dick,  and  a  host  of  other  writers,  have  adopted 
and  enforced  this  view,  Brewster  going  so  far  as  to 
maintain  the  probability  that  life  may  exist  upon  the 
moon,  dead  though  her  surface  seems,  or  beneath  the 
glowing  photosphere  of  the  sun.  But  even  where  so 
extreme  an  opinion  has  not  been  entertained,  the  believers 
in  the  theory  of  a  plurality  of  worlds  have  maintained 
that  all  the  celestial  orbs  have  been  created  to  be,  and 
are  at  this  present  time,  the  abodes  of  life,  or  else  minister 
to  the  wants  of  creatures  living  in  other  orbs.  It  is 
worthy  of  notice  that  this  view  has  been  entertained  even 
by  astronomers,  who,  like  the  Herschels,  have  devoted 
their  lives  to  the  scientific  study  of  the  heavens.  So  com- 
pletely has  the  theory  been  identified,  as  it  were,  with 
modern  astronomy,  that  we  find  the  astronomer  passing 
from  a  statement  respecting  some  observed  fact  about  a 
planet,  to  the  consideration  of  the  bearing  of  the  fact  on 


46  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

the  requirements  of  living  creatures  on  the  planet's 
surface,  without  expressing  any  doubt  whatever  as  to  the 
existence  of  such  creatures.  For  example,  Sir  John 
Herschel,  writing  about  the  rings  of  Saturn,  after  dis- 
cussing Lardner's  supposed  demonstration  that  the  eclipses 
caused  by  the  rings  would  last  but  for  a  short  time ;  * 
says,  '  This  will  not  prevent,  however,  some  considerable 
regions  of  Saturn  from  suffering  very  long  total  inter- 
ception of  the  solar  beams,  affording  to  our  ideas  but  an 
inhospitable  asylum  to  animated  beings,  ill  compensated 
by  the  feeble  light  of  the  satellites  ;  but  we  shall  do 
wrong  to  judge  of  the  fitness  or  unfitness  of  their  condi- 
tion from  what  we  see  around  us,  when  perhaps  the  very 
combinations  which  convey  to  our  minds  only  images 
of  horror  may  be,  in  reality,  theatres  of  the  most  striking 
and  glorious  displays  of  beneficent  contrivance.'  And 
many  other  such  cases  might  be  cited. 

Before  passing  to  the  opposite  view  of  life  in  other  worlds, 
a  view  commonly  associated  with  the  name  of  the  late 
Dr.  "Whewell,  I  shall  venture  to  quote  a  few  passages 
from  his  Bridgewater  Treatise  on  Astronomy  and  General 
Physics,  in  which  he  writes  very  much  like  a  supporter 
of  the  theory  he  subsequently  opposed  in  his  '  Plurality 

*  This  is  disproved,  and  the  justice  of  Herschel's  views  demonstrated 
in  chapter  vii.  of  my  treatise  on  Saturn,  in  which  work  I  give  a  table 
of  the  climatic  relations  in  Saturn  (for  I  also  once  adopted  the  theory 
criticized  above)  the  time  and  place  of  sunrise  and  sunset  in  Saturnian 
latitudes  in  Saturnian  Spring,  Summer,  Autumn,  and  Winter,  and  so 
on.  Labour  wasted,  I  fear,  except  as  practice  in  Geometrical 
Astronomy. 


A  New  Theory  of  Life  in  other  Worlds.    47 

of  Worlds.'  Thus,  speaking  of  the  satellites  in  the  solar 
system,  he  says, — '  There  is  one  fact  which  immediately 
arrests  our  attention ;  the  number  of  these  attendant 
bodies  appears  to  increase  as  we  proceed  to  planets  farther 
and  farther  from  the  sun.  Such,  at  least,  is  the  general 
rule.  Mercury  and  Venus,  the  planets  near  the  sun,  have 
no  attendants  ;  the  earth  has  but  one.  Mars,  indeed, 
who  is  still  further  removed,  has  none,  nor  have  the  minor 
planets,  so  that  the  rule  is  only  approximately  verified. 
But  Jupiter,  who  is  at  five  times  the  earth's  distance,  has 
four  satellites  ;  and  Saturn,  who  is  again  at  a  distance 
nearly  twice  as  great,  has  seven'  (now  eight)  'besides  that 
most  extraordinary  phenomenon,  his  ring,  which  for 
purposes  of  illumination  is  equivalent  to  many  thousand 
satellites.  Of  Uranus  it  is  difficult  to  speak,  for  his  great 
distance  renders  it  almost  impossible  to  observe  the 
smaller  circumstances  of  his  condition.  It  does  not 
appear  at  all  probable  that  he  has  a  ring  like  Saturn ; 
but  he  has  at  least  four  satellites  which  are  visible  to  us, 
at  the  enormous  distance  of  900  millions  of  miles,  and  I 
believe  that  the  astronomer  will  hardly  deny  that  he  may 
possibly  have  thousands  of  smaller  ones  circulating  about 
him.  But  leaving  conjecture,  and  taking  only  the  ascer- 
tained cases  of  Venus,  the  Earth,  Jupiter,  and  Saturn,  we 
conceive  that  a  person  of  common  understanding  will  be 
strongly  impressed  with  the  persuasion  that  the  satellites 
are  placed  in  the  system  with  a  view  to  compensate  for  the 
diminished  light  of  the  sun  at  greater  distances.'  Then  he 
presently  adds,  after  considering  the  exceptional  case  of 


48  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

Mars, — *  No  one  familiar  with  such  contemplations  will, 
by  one  anomaly,  be  driven  from  the  persuasion  that  the 
end  which  the  arrangements  of  the  satellites  seem  suited  to 
answer  is  really  one  of  the  ends  of  their  creation.'  Here 
is  the  theoiy  of  life  in  other  worlds  definitely  adopted,  and 
moreover  presented  in  company  with  the  extremest  form  of 
the  teleological  argument,  and  that,  too,  by  Whewell,  whose 
name  afterwards  became  associated  with  the  extremest 
development  of  the  doctrine  of  the  paucity  of  worlds ! 

The  "Whewellite  theory  is  tolerably  well  known,  though 
certainly  it  is  not  held  in  very  great  favour.  For  my  own 
part,  I  used,  at  one  time,  to  think  that  "Whewell  only 
advanced  it  in  jest ;  but  now  (perhaps  because  my  own 
researches  and  study  have  led  me  to  regard  the  Brewsterian 
theory  as  untenable)  I  recognise  in  "Whewell's  later  views 
the  result  of  longer  and  more  careful  study  than  he  had 
given  to  the  subject,  when  (nearly  a  quarter  of  a  century 
earlier)  he  wrote  his  Bridgewater  Treatise. 

Whatever  opinion  we  form  as  to  the  theory  advanced 
in  the  '  Plurality  of  Worlds,'  we  must  admit  that  Whewell 
did  good  service  to  science  in  breaking  the  chains  of  old- 
fashioned  ideas,  and  inaugurating  freedom  of  discussion. 
The  stock  writers  on  astronomy  had  been  repeating  so  often 
the  imperfect  analogies  on  which  astronomers  had  earlier 
insisted,  that  the  suggestions  based  on  such  analogies  had 
come  to  be  regarded  as  so  many  scientific  facts.  The 
Earth  is  a  planet,  and  Mars  is  a  planet,  therefore  what 
we  know  about  the  Earth  may  be  inferred  respecting  Mars, 
no  account  being  taken  of  the  known  difference  in  the 


A  New  Theory  of  Life  in  other  Worlds.    49 

condition  of  the  two  planets :  accordingly,  not  only  are 
the  white  spots  at  the  Martian  poles  to  be  regarded  as 
snow-covered  regions,  and  the  blue  markings  on  his 
surface  as  seas,  but  we  are  to  infer  a  similarity  of  climatic 
conditions  and  other  habitudes,  without  entering  into  any 
close  consideration  of  the  probable  extent  of  the  planet's 
atmosphere,  the  heat  received  from  the  Sun  by  Mars,  and 
a  variety  of  other  relations  respecting  which  we  are  at 
least  as  well  informed  as  we  are  respecting  the  analogies 
in  question.  Jupiter,  again,  is  a  planet,  and  though  he  is 
so  much  larger  than  the  Earth  that  we  might  be  disposed 
at  the  outset  to  regard  him  as  a  body  of  another  order,  we 
must  be  so  guided  by  analogies  (which,  after  all,  may  be 
imaginary)  as  to  consider  that  his  size  only  renders  him 
so  much  the  nobler  an  abode  for  such  life  as  we  are 
familiar  with :  and  instead  of  being  struck  by  the  fact 
that  Jupiter,  unlike  Mars,  shows  no  polar  snow-caps,  we 
are  to  direct  our  attention  to  his  belts,  and  to  regard  them 
as  cloud-belts  analogous  to  the  tropical  cloud-zone  of  the 
Earth.  Nor  are  we  to  enquire  too  closely  whether  the 
aspect  of  his  equatorial  belt,  to  say  nothing  of  his  other 
belts,  corresponds  in  any  degree  with  that  which  the 
cloud-zone  of  our  Earth  would  present  to  observers  on 
another  planet : — Let  it  suffice  to  note  a  few  analogies,  as 
thus— "The  Earth  is  a  planet,  Jupiter  is  a  planet;  the 
Earth  rotates  and  therefore  has  a  day,  Jupiter  rotates  and 
has  a  day ;  the  Earth  has  a  year,  Jupiter  has  a  year ;  the 
Earth  has  clouds,  Jupiter  has  clouds ;  the  Earth  has  a 
moon,  Jupiter  has  four  moons  i  this  done,  every  other 


50  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

consideration  may  be  conveniently  overlooked,  and  we 
may  proceed  to  descant  on  the  wonderful  extent  and 
dignity  of  this  distant  world,  with  as  little  question  of  its 
being  inhabited  as  though  we  had  seen  with  our  own  eyes 
the  creatures  which  exist  upon  the  planet's  surface.  So 
with  Saturn,  and  the  rest." 

Whewell  broke  through  all  these  old-fashioned  methods. 
He  dealt  with  the  several  planets  on  the  true  scientific 
principle  long  since  enunciated  by  Descartes,  taking 
nothing  for  granted  that  had  not  been  proved.  He  showed 
how  unlike  the  conditions  prevailing  in  the  other  planets 
must  be  to  those  existing  on  the  Earth,  and  without 
pretending  to  demonstrate  absolutely  that  none  of  the 
higher  forms  of  life  can  exist  on  certain  planets,  he  showed 
that  at  any  rate  the  probabilities  are  in  favour  of  that 
hypothesis.  Passing  on  to  the  stars,  he  did  good  service 
by  showing  how  much  had  been  taken  for  granted  by 
astronomers  in  their  assumptions  respecting  those  orbs ; 
nor  is  the  value  of  his  work,  in  this  field,  by  any  means 
diminished,  by  the  circumstance  that  during  recent  years 
evidence  which  was  wanting  when  Whewell  wrote  has 
been  obtained,  and  the  stars  have  been  shown  demon- 
stratively to  be  suns.  And  lastly,  he  dealt  in  an  inde- 
pendent, and  therefore  instructive  manner,  with  the  star- 
cloudlets  or  nebulsB,  giving  many  strong  reasons  for 
doubting  the  views  which  were  at  that  time  repeated  in 
every  text-book  of  astronomy. 

The  conclusions  to  which  "Whewell  was  led  were  (1) 
that  no  sufficient  reason  exists  for  believing  in  other 


A  New  Theory  of  Life  in  other  Worlds.     51 

worlds  than  ours ;  and  (2)  if  the  other  planets  are 
inhabited,  it  can  only  be,  in  all  probability,  by  creatures 
belonging  to  the  lowest  orders  of  animated  existence.  He 
somewhat  softened  the  harshness  of  these  inferences  by 
pointing  out  that  our  conceptions  of  the  glories  of  God's 
kingdom  need  not  be  enfeebled  by  our  doubts  as  to  the 
existence  of  life  in  the  planets  of  our  own  system,  or  of 
systems  circling  around  other  suns.  "  However  destitute," 
he  wrote,  "  planets,  moon,  and  rings  may  be  of  inhabitants, 
they  are  at  least  vast  scenes  of  God's  presence,  and  of  the 
activity  with  which  He  carries  into  effect  everywhere  the 
laws  of  nature ;  and  the  glory  of  creation  arises  from  its 
being,  not  only  the  product,  but  the  constant  field  of  God's 
activity  and  thought,  wisdom,  and  power."  And,  in 
passing,  I  may  note  that  Sir  David  Brewster,  when  com- 
menting somewhat  angrily  and  contemptuously  on  this 
remark,  failed  really  to  grasp  Whewell's  meaning. 
Brewster  was  at  great  pains  to  shew  how  large  a  portion 
of  the  glories  of  the  heavens  is  invisible  and  useless  to 
man;  but  Whewell  was  manifestly  not  referring  to  the 
glories  of  God  as  revealed  to  man,  but  as  they  exist  in 
themselves.  It  must  be  admitted,  indeed,  even  by  those 
who  prefer  Brewster's  theory,  that  he  maintained  it  with 
much  more  warmth,  than  was  necessary  in  such  a  discus- 
sion. In  presence  of  Whewell's  philosophic,  calm,  and 
dispassionate  force  of  reasoning,  there  was  something 
almost  ludicrous  in  the  impassioned  outbursts  of  the  great 
physicist  who  took  the  doctrine  of  life  in  other  worlds 
under  his  protection.  "  Where,"  says  he,  "  is  the  grandeur, 


5  2  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

where  the  utility,  where  the  beauty,  where  the  poetry,  of 
the  two  almost  invisible  stars  which  usurp  the  celestial 
names  of  Uranus  and  Neptune,  and  which  have  been  seen 
by  none  but  a  very  few  even  of  the  cultivators  of 
astronomy?  The  seaman  in  the  trackless  ocean  never 
seeks  their  guidance  ;  to  him  they  have  not  even  the  value 
of  the  pole  star ;  they  contribute  nothing  to  the  arts  of 
terrestrial  life :  they  neither  light  the  traveller  on  his 
journey,  nor  mark  by  their  feeble  ray  the  happy  hours 
which  are  consecrated  to  friendship  and  to  love."  All 
this  is  very  pretty  writing,  but  it  is  very  little  to  the  pur- 
pose, and  while  it  has  no  bearing  whatever  on  what 
Whewell  had  urged,  it  is  a  very  long  way  from  establishing 
what  Brewster  desired  to  prove,  viz.,  that  '*  Uranus  and 
Neptune  must  have  been  created  for  other  and  nobler 
ends ;  to  be  the  abodes  of  life  and  intelligence,  the  colossal 
temples  where  their  Creator  is  recognised  and  worshipped  ; 
the  remotest  watch-towers  of  our  system,  from  which  His 
works  may  be  better  studied,  and  His  distant  glories  more 
readily  descried.'  ' 

Here,  however,  are  two  theories — opposed  to  each  other, 
and  not  admitting  of  being  reconciled.  If  we  are  to  make 
a  selection  between  them,  to  which  shall  we  turn  in  pre- 
ference ?  The  balance  of  evidence  is  on  the  whole  in  favour 
of  Whewell's,  (so  at  least  the  matter  presents  itself  to  me 
after  careful  and  long-continued  study) ;  but  certainly 
Brewster's  is  the  theory  which  commends  itself  most 
favourably  to  the  mind  which  would  believe  that  God 
"hath  done  all  things  well,"  and  that  nothing  that  He 


A  New  Theory  of  Life  in  other  Worlds.     53 

has  made  was  made  in  vain.  Even  those  who,  like  myself, 
are  indisposed  to  admit  that  the  ways  and  works  of  God 
are  to  be  judged  by  our  conceptions  of  the  fitness  of 
things,  (though  we  may  be  altogether  certain  that  all  things 
are  made  in  wisdom  and  fitness),  would  prefer  to  accept  the 
Brewsterian  theory,  if  decision  were  to  be  made  between 
the  two.  For,  what  amount  of  evidence  could  reconcile 
us  to  the  belief  (even  though  it  forced  this  belief  upon  us) 
that  our  Earth  alone  of  all  the  countless  orbs  which  people 
space,  is  the  abode  of  reasoning  creatures,  capable  of  recog- 
nising the  glories  of  the  universe,  and  of  lauding  the 
Creator  of  those  wonders  and  of  their  own  selves  ? 
Nevertheless  we  must  be  guided  in  these  matters  by 
evidence,  not  by  sentiment — by  facts,  not  by  our  feelings. 
It  is  well,  therefore,  to  note  that  the  decision  does  not  lie 
between  the  two  theories  which  have  just  been  dealt  with. 
Another  theory,  holding  a  position  intermediate  between 
those  two,  and  combining  in  my  judgment  the  evidence 
which  favours  one  theory  with  the  fitness  characterising 
the  other,  remains  yet  to  be  presented.  The  last  essay 
was  intended  to  prepare  the  way  for  this  theory. 

I  propose  to  take,  as  the  basis  of  the  new  theory  of  life 
in  other  worlds,  the  analogy  which  has  commonly  been 
regarded  as  affording  the  strongest  evidence  in  favour  of 
the  Brewsterian  theory, — only  I  shall  take  a  more  extended 
view  of  the  subject  than  has  been  customary. 

Before  introducing  that  Brewsterian  argument,  I  may 
remark  that  the  mere  fact  that  our  Earth  is  an  inhabited 
world  is  not  in  itself  sufficient  even  to  render  probable 


54  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

the  theory  that  there  is  life  in  other  worlds  than  ours. 
An  equally  strong  argument  might  be  derived  against  that 
theory  from  the  study  of  our  Moon, — the  only  other  planet 
of  which  we  have  obtained  reliable  information, — for  few 
can  suppose  that  the  Moon  is  fit  to  be  the  abode  of  life. 
Since  then  of  the  two  planets  we  can  examine,  one — the 
Earth — is  inhabited,  while  the  other — the  Moon — is  pro- 
bably not  inhabited,  the  only  evidence  we  have  is  almost 
equally  divided  between  the  Whewellite  and  Brewsterian 
theories,  whatever  balance  remains  in  favour  of  the 
latter  being  too  slight  to  afford  any  sufficient  basis  for  a 
conclusion. 

But  while  this  reasoning  is  jtfst,  as  applied  to  the  mere 
fact  that  the  Earth  is  inhabited,  it  is  by  no  means  capable 
of  overthrowing  the  evidence  which  is  derived  from  the 
manner  in  which  life  exists  on  the  Earth.  When  we 
consider  the  various  conditions  under  which  life  is  found 
to  prevail,  that  no  difference  of  climatic  relations  or  of 
elevation,  of  land  or  of  air  or  of  water,  of  soil  in  land, 
of  freshness  or  saltness  in  water,  of  density  in  air, 
appears  (so  far  as  our  researches  have  extended)  to  render 
life  impossible,  we  are  compelled  to  infer  that  the  power 
of  supporting  life  is  a  quality  which  has  an  exceedingly 
wide  range  in  nature.  I  refrain,  it  will  be  noticed,  from 
using  here  the  usual  expression,  and  saying,  as  of  yore, 
that '  the  great  end  and  aim  of  all  the  workings  of  nature 
is  to  afford  scope  and  room  for  the  support  of  life,'  because 
this  mode  of  speaking  may  be  misunderstood.  We  can 
see  what  nature  actually  does,  and  we  may  infer,  if  we 


A  New  Theory  of  Life  in  other  Worlds.     55 

so  please,  that  such  or  such  is  the  end  and  aim  of  the  God 
of  nature ;  nevertheless  we  must  remember  that  the 
evidence  we  have  belongs  to  the  former  relation  not  to  the 
latter.  I  am  careful  to  dwell  on  this  point  because  the 
longer  I  study  such  matters  the  more  clearly  do  I  recog- 
nise the  necessity  of  most  studiously  limiting  our  state- 
ments to  that  which  the  evidence  before  us  really 
establishes. 

Passing  beyond  the  evidence  which  the  Earth  at  present 
affords,  we  find  that  during  many  ages  the  Earth  has 
presented  a  similar  scene.  '  Geology,'  I  wrote  four  years 
ago, '  teaches  us  of  days  when  this  Earth  was  peopled  with 
strange  creatures  such  as  now  are  not  found  upon  its 
surface.  We  turn  our  thoughts  to  the  epochs  when  these 
monsters  throve  and  multiplied,  and  picture  to  ourselves 
the  appearance  which  our  Earth  then  presented.  Strange 
forms  of  vegetation  clothe  the  scene  which  the  mind's  eye 
dwells  upon.  The  air  is  heavily  laden  with  moisture  to 
noiirish  the  abundant  flora ;  hideous  reptiles  crawl  over 
their  slimy  domain,  battling  with  each  other,  or  with  the 
denizens  of  the  forest ;  huge  bat-like  creatures  sweep 
through  the  dusky  twilight  which  constituted  the  primaeval 
day ;  weird  monsters  pursue  their  prey  amid  the  depths 
of  ocean  :  and  we  forget,  as  we  dwell  upon  the  strange 
forms  which  existed  in  those  long  past  ages,  that  the 
scene  now  presented  by  the  Earth  is  no  less  wonderful,  and 
that  the  records  of  our  time  may,  perhaps,  seem  one  day  as 
perplexing  as  we  now  find  those  of  the  geological  eras.' 
In  the  past,  then,  as  in  the  present,  this  Earth  was  in- 


56  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

habited  by  countless  millions  of  living  creatures,  and 
during  the  enormous  period  which  has  elapsed  since  life 
first  appeared  on  the  surface  of  the  Earth,  myriads  if  not 
millions,  of  orders  of  living  creatures  have  appeared,  have 
lived  the  life  appointed  to  their  order,  and  have  vanished, 
or  exist  only  under  modified  forms.  As  each  individual 
has  had  its  period  of  life,  so  also  has  each  race,  and  we 
may  say  with  the  poet  (noting  always  that  the  personifica- 
tion of  nature  is  but  a  poetical  idea,  and  does  not  present 
any  real  substantive  truth), — 

Are  God  and  Nature  then  at  strife, 
That  Nature  lends  such  evil  dreams  ? 
So  careful  of  the  type  she  seems. 

So  careless  of  the  single  life. 

'  So  careful  of  the  type  ?  '  but  no, 

From  scarped  cliff  and  quarried  stone 
She  cries,  '  A  thousand  types  are  gone  ; 
I  care  for  nothing,  all  shall  go.' 

Abundant  life,  in  ever-varying  forms,  and  under  all- 
various  conditions,  continuing  age  after  age  during 
hundreds  of  thousands  of  years,  such  is  what  our  Earth 
presents  to  us  when  we  turn  our  thoughts  to  its  past 
history.  And  looking  forward,  a  similar  scene  is  presented 
to  our  contemplation.  For  many  a  long  century,  probably 
for  hundreds  of  thousands  of  years,  life  will  continue  on 
the  Earth,  unless  some  catastrophe  (the  occurrence  of  which 
we  have  as  yet  no  reason  to  anticipate)  should  destroy  life 
suddenly  from  off  her  surface. 

So  viewing  this  Earth,  we  seem  -to  find  forced  upon  us 
the  belief  that  the  support  of  life  is  the  object  for  which 


A  New  Theory  of  Life  in  other  Worlds.     5  7 

the  Earth  was  created,  and  thus  we- are  led  to  regard  the 
other  orbs  which,  like  her,  circle  around  a  central  Sun,  as 
intended  to  be  the  abode  of  life.  The  only  object  which, 
so  far  as  we  can  see,  the  Earth  has  fulfilled  during  an 
indefinitely  long  period  has  been  to  present  a  field,  so  to 
speak,  for  the  support  of  life,  nor  can  we  recognise  any 
other  purpose  which  she  will  fulfil  in  the  future.  If  we 
admit  this,  and  if 'we  also  believe  that  God  made  nothing 
without  some  purpose,  of  course  we  have  no  choice  but  to 
admit  that  the  purpose  with  which  the  Earth  was  made 
was  the  support  of  life.  And  reasoning  from  analogy,  we 
infer  that  the  other  planets,  as  well  those  of  our  own 
system  as  those  which  we  believe  to  exist,  'wheeling  in 
perpetual  round/  as  attendants  upon  other  Suns,  were 
similarly  created  to  be  the  abode  of  life.* 

*  I  shall  venture  to  quote  here  the  once  celebrated  argument 
advanced  by  Dr.  Bentley  in  favour  of  the  plurality  of  worlds  : — 
"Considering,"  he  says,  "that  the  soul  of  one  virtuous  and  religious 
man  is  of  greater  worth  and  excellency  than  the  Sun  and  all  his 
planets,  and  all  the  stars  in  the  heavens,  their  usefulness  to  man  might 
be  the  sole  end  of  their  creation  if  it  could  be  proved  that  they  were 
as  beneficial  to  us  as  the  pole  star  formerly  was  for  navigation,  or  as 
the  Moon  is  for  producing  the  tides  and  lighting  us  on  winter  nights. 
But  we  dare  not  undertake  to  show  what  advantage  is  brought  to  us 
by  those  innumerable  stars  in  the  galaxy  of  other  parts  of  the  firma- 
ment, not  discernible  by  naked  eyes,  and  yet  each  many  thousand 
times  bigger  than  the  whole  body  of  the  Earth.  If  you  say  they  beget 
in  us  a  great  idea  and  veneration  of  the  mighty  author  and  governor  of 
such  stupendous  bodies,  and  excite  and  devote  our  minds  to  His 
adoration  and  praise,  you  say  very  truly  and  well.  But  would  it  not 
raise  in  "us  a  higher  apprehension  of  the  infinite  majesty  and  boundless 
beneficence  of  God,  to  suppose  that  those  remote  and  vast  bodies  were 
formed,  not  merely  upon  our  account,  to  be  peeped  at  through  an  optic 
glass,  but  for  different  ends  and  nobler  purposes  ?  And  yet  who  will 
deny  that  there  are  great  multitudes  of  lucid  stars  even  beyond  the 


58  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

But,  before  we  infer  from  the  strength  of  this  reasoning 
that  the  other  planets  are  inhabited  worlds,  let  us  look 
somewhat  more  closely  into  the  circumstances,  or  rather, 
instead  of  examining  only  a  portion  of  the  evidence,  let 
us  take  a  wider  survey  and  examine  all  the  evidence  we 
possess.  It  may  appear,  at  a  first  view,  that  already  we 
are  dealing  with  periods  which,  to  our  conceptions,  are 
practically  infinite.  How  long,  compared  with  the  brief 
span  of  human  life,  are  the  eras  with  which  history  deals  ! 
how  enormous,  even  by  comparison  with  these  eras,  appears 
the  range  of  time  (tens  of  thousands,  if  not  hundreds  of 
thousands  of  years),  since  man  first  appeared  upon  this 
earth !  and,  according  to  the  teachings  of  geology,  we 
have  to  deal  with  a  yet  higher  order  of  time  in  passing 
to  the  beginning  of  life  upon  our  globe.  From  one  million 
of  years  to  ten  millions !  It  is  between  such  limits,  say 
the  most  experienced  geologists,  that  the  choice  lies.  Surely 
we  may  be  content  with  periods  such  as  these,  periods  as 

reach  of  the  best  telescopes  ;  and  that  every  visible  star  may  have 
opaque  planets  revolving  about  them  which  we  cannot  discover  ?  Now 
if  they  were  not  created  for  our  sakes  it  is  certain  and  evident  that 
they  were  not  made  for  their  own  ;  for  matter  has  no  life  or  perception, 
is  not  conscious  of  its  own  existence,  nor  capable  of  happiness,  nor 
gives  the  sacrifice  of  praise  and  worship  to  the  author  of  its  being.  It 
remains,  therefore,  that  all  bodies  were  formed  for  the  sake  of  intelli- 
gent minds  ;  and  as  the  Earth  was  principally  designed  for  the  being 
and  service  and  contemplation  of  men,  why  may  not  all  other  planets 
be  created  for  the  like  uses,  each  for  their  own  inhabitants  which  have 
life  and  understanding?'  The  objection  to  Dr.  Bentley's  argument 
resides,  not  in  the  belief  which  he  expresses  in  the  Wisdom  and  Benefi- 
cence of  the  Creator,  but  in  the  confidence  with  which  he  assumes  that 
the  Creator  had  such  and  such  purposes, — and  not  perhaps  others 
such  as  we  not  only  cannot  discover,  but  cannot  even  conceive. 


A  New  Theory  of  Life  in  other  Worlds.    59 

utterly  beyond  our  powers  of  conception  as  the  duration 
of  the  pyramids  would  be  to  creatures  like  the  ephemeron, 
did  such  creatures  possess  the  power  of  reason ! 

And  yet,  why  should  we  stop  at  the  beginning  of  life 
upon  this  Earth  ?  We  have  passed  to  higher  and  higher 
orders  of  time-intervals,  but  the  series  has  no  limit  that 
we  know  of,  while  it  possesses  terms,  recognisable  by  us, 
of  higher  order  than  those  we  have  been  dealing  with. 
We  know  that  in  the  far-off  times  before  life  appeared, 

The  solid  Earth  whereon  we  tread 
In  tracts  of  fluent  heat  began, 
And  grew  to  seeming-random  forms, 
The  seeming  prey  of  cyclic  storms. 

Let  us  look  back  at  that  part  of  the  Earth's  history,  and 
see  whether  the  long  periods  which  we  have  contemplated 
may  not  be  matched  and  more  than  matched  by  the  aeons 
which  preceded  them.  When  we  thus 

Contemplate  all  this  work  of  Time 
The  giant  labouring  in  his  youth, 

we  see  how  far  we  have  been  from  recognising  the  true 
breadth  of  the  mighty  waves  on  one  of  which  the  life  upon 
this  Earth  has  been  borne,  we  see  that  as  yet  we  have  not 

Come  on  that  which  is,  and  caught 
The  deep  pulsations  of  the  world, — 
Ionian  music  measuring  out 
The  steps  of  time. 

Taking  as  the  extremest  span  of  the  past  existence  of  life 
upon  the  Earth  ten  millions  of  years,  we  learn  from 
the  researches  of  physicists  that  the  age  preceding  that  of 
life  (the  age  during  which  the  world  was  a  mass  of  molten 


60  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

rock),  lasted  more  than  thirty-five  times  as  long,  since 
Bischoff  has  shown  that  the  Earth  would  require  350 
millions  of  years  to  cool  down  from  a  temperature  of  2,000° 
Centigrade  to  200°.  But  far  back  beyond  the  commence- 
ment of  that  vast  era,  our  Earth  existed  as  a  nebulous 
mass,  nor  can  we  form  even  a  conjecture  as  yet  respecting 
the  length  of  time  during  which  that  earlier  stage  of  the 
Earth's  existence  continued. 

So  much  for  the  past.  Of  the  future  we  know  less. 
But  still  we  recognise,  not  indistinctly,  a  time  wrhen  all 
life  will  have  ceased  upon  the  Earth.  "Whether  by  the 
process  of  refrigeration  wrhich  is  going  on,  or  by  the 
gradual  exhaustion  of  the  forces  which  at  present  reside 
in  the  Earth,  or  by  the  change  in  the  length  of  the  day 
which  we  know  to  be  slowly  taking  place,  a  time  must 
come  when  the  condition  of  our  earth  will  no  longer  be 
suited  for  the  support  of  life.  Or  it  may  be  that  Stanilas 
Meunier  is  right  in  his  theory  that  as  a  planet  grows 
older,  the  oceans,  and  even  the  atmosphere,  are  gradually 
withdrawn  into  the  interior  of  the  planet's  globe,  where 
space  is  formed  for  them  by  the  cooling  and  contracting 
of  the  solid  frame  of  the  planet.  But  apart  froni  all  such 
considerations,  we  know  that  a  process  of  exhaustion  is 
taking  place,  even  in  the  Sun  himself,  whence  all  that 
exists  upon  the  Earth  derives  its  life  and  daily  nourish- 
ment. So  that  indirectly  by  the  dying  out  of  the  source 
of  life,  if  not  directly  by  the  dying  out  of  life,  this  Earth 
must  one  day  become  as  bleak  and  desolate  a  scene  as 
we  believe  the  Moon  to  be  at  this  present  time. 


A  New  Theory  of  Life  in  other  Worlds.    61 

It  is  easy  to  recognise  the  bearing  of  these  con- 
siderations upon  the  question  of  life  in  other  worlds.  We 
had  been  led  by  the  contemplation  of  the  long  continuance 
of  life  upon  this  Earth,  to  regard  the  support  of  life  as  in 
a  sense  the  object  of  planetary  existence,  and  therefore 
to  view  the  other  planets  as  the  abode  of  life.  But  we 
now  see  that  the  time  during  which  life  has  existed  on 
the  earth,  has  been  a  mere  wavelet  in  the  sea  of  our 
Earth's  lifetime,  this  sea  itself  being  but  a  minute  portion 
of  the. infinite  ocean  of  time,  while,  as  Tyndall  has  well 
remarked,  in  that  infinite  ocean,  the  history  of  man  (the 
sole  creature  known  to  us  that  can  appreciate  the  wonders 
of  creation)  is  but  the  merest  ripple.  We  learn,  then, 
from  the  Earth's  history,  a  lesson  the  very  reverse  of  that 
which  before  we  had  seemed  so  clearly  to  read  there. 
It  is  not  the  chief,  but  only  a  minute  portion  of  the 
Earth's  existence  which  has  been  characterised  by  the 
existence  .of  life  upon  our  globe  ;  and  if  we  adopted  the 
teaching  now  brought  before  us,  as  readily  as  before  we 
learned  that  other  lesson,  we  should  say,  '  It  is  not  the 
chief,  but  only  an  utterly  subordinate  part  of  nature's 
purpose,  to  provide  for  the  existence  and  support  of 
life.' 

We  have  been  led  by  the  study  of  the  probable  past 
history  of  the  earth,  and  by  the  consideration  of  her 
probable  future  fortunes,  to  the  conclusion,  that  although 
life  has  existed  on  her  surface  for  an  enormously  long 
period,  and  will  continue  for  a  corresponding  period  in 
the  future,  yet  the  whole  duration  of  life  must  be  regarded 


62  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

but  as  a  wave  on  the  vast  ocean  of  time,  while  the 
duration  of  the  life  of  creatures  capable  of  reasoning  upon 
the  wonders  which  surround  them,  is  but  as  a  ripple  upon 
the  surface  of  such  a  wave.  It  matters  little  then 
whether  we  take  life  itself,  without  distinction  of  kind  or 
order,  or  whether  we  take  only  the  life  of  man,  we  still 
find  a  disproportion  which  must  be  regarded  as  practically 
infinite,  between  the  duration  of  such  life,  and  the 
duration  of  the  preceding  and  following  periods  when 
there  has  been  and  will  be  no  such  life  upon  the  earth. 

But  yet,  in  passing,  I  cannot  but  point  to  the  fact  that 
in  considering  the  usual  arguments  for  life  in  other  worlds, 
I  might  limit  myself  to  the  existence  of  rational  beings. 
It  would  be  difficult  to  show  that  mere  life,  without  the 
power  which  man  possesses  of  appreciating  the  wonders 
of  the  universe,  is  a  more  fitting  final  purpose  in  creation 
than  the  existence  of  lifeless  but  moving  masses  like  the 
suns  and  their  attendant  planets.  The  insect  or  the 
fish,  the  bird  or  the  mammal,  the  minutest  microscopic 
animalcule  or  the  mightiest  cetacean,  may  afford  sug- 
gestive indications  of  what  we  describe  as  beneficent  con- 
trivance ;  yet  it  is  hard  to  see  in  what  essential  respect  a 
universe  of  worlds  beyond  our  own,  inhabited  only  by 
such  animals,  would  accord  better  with  those  ideas  which 
the  believers  in  the  plurality  of  worlds  entertain  respecting 
the  purpose  of  the  Almighty,  than  a  universe  with  none 
but  vegetable  life,  or  a  universe  with  no  life  at  all,  yet 
replete  with,  wonderful  and  wonderfully  moving  masses 
of  matter.  It  is  rational  life  alone  to  which  the  arguments 


A  New  Theory  of  Life  in  other  Worlds.    63 

of  our  Brewsters  and  Chalmers  really  relate.  Nor 
would  it  be  difficult  to  raise  here  another  perplexing 
consideration,  by  inquiring  what  degree  of  cultivation  of 
the  intellect  in  human  races  accords  with  the  '  argument 
from  admiration  '  which  the  followers  of  Brewster  delight 
to  employ.  The  savage  engaged  in  the  mere  effort  to 
support  life  or  to  combat  his  foes,  knows  nothing  of  the 
glories  whereof  science  tells  us.  The  wonders  of  nature, 
so  far  as  they  affect  him  at  all,  tend  to  give  ignoble  and 
debasing  ideas  of  the  being  or  beings  to  whose  power  he 
attributes  the  occurrence  of  natural  phenomena.  Nor  as 
we  advance  in  the  scale  of  civilization,  do  we  quickly 
arrive  at  the  stage  where  the  admiration  of  nature  begins 
to  be  an  ordinary  exercise  even  of  a  few  minds.  Still 
less  do  we  arrive  quickly,  even  in  reviewing  the  progress 
of  the  most  civilized  races,  at  the  stage  when  the  generality 
of  men  give  much  of  their  thoughts  to  the  natural  wonders 
which  surround  them.  Is  it  saying  too  much  to  assert 
that  this  stage  has  never  yet  been  attained  by  any 
nation,  even  the  most  advanced  and  the  most  cultured  ? 
If  we  limit  ourselves,  however,  to  the  existence  merely 
of  some  few  nations,  amongst  whom  the  study  of  nature 
has  been  more  or  less  in  vogue,  how  brief  in  the  history 
of  this  earth  has  been  the  period  when  such  nations  have 
existed  !  how  brief  the  continuance  of  those  among  such 
nations  which  belong  to  the  past,  and  whose  whole  history 
is  thus  known  to  us  !  how  few  even  in  such  nations  the 
men  who  have  been  so  deeply  impressed  with  the 
wonders  of  nature,  as  to  be  led  to  the  utterance  of  their 


64  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

thoughts !  If  the  life  of  man  is  but  as  a  ripple  where 
life  itself  is  as  a  wave  on  the  ocean  of  time,  surely  the 
life  of  man  as  the  student  and  admirer  of  nature,  is  but 
as  the  tiniest  of  wave-crests  upon  the  ripple  of  human 
life. 

How,  then,  does  all  this  bear  upon  the  question  of  life 
in  other  worlds?  The  answer  will  be  manifest  if  we 
apply  to  these  considerations  the  same  argument  which 
Brewster  and  Chalmers  have  applied  to  the  evidence 
which  indicates  the  enormous  duration  of  life  upon  the 
earth.  Since  this  enormous  duration,  taking  life  even  in 
its  most  general  aspect,  has  been  shown  to  be  as  a  mere 
nothing  by  comparison  with  the  practically  infinite  dura- 
tion of  the  earth  without  life,  the  argument  as  respects 
life  in  any  other  world  (at  least,  in  any  world  of  which 
antecedently  we  know  nothing)  must  be  directly  reversed. 
It  is  far  more  probable  that  that  world  is  now  passing 
through  a  part  of  the  stage  preceding  the  appearance  of 
life,  or  of  the  stage  following  the  appearance  of  life,  than 
that  this  particular  epoch  belongs  to  the  period  when  that 
particular  world  is  inhabited.  If,  indeed,  we  had  some 
special  reason  for  believing  that  this  epoch  to  which 
terrestrial  life  belongs  has  some  special  importance  as 
respects  the  whole  universe,  we  might  feel  unwilling  to 
consider  the  question  of  life  in  any  other  world  independ- 
ently of  preconceptions  derived  from  our  experience  in 
this  world.  But  I  apprehend  that  we  have  no  reason 
whatever  for  so  believing.  It  appears  to  me  that  such  a 
belief — that  is,  the  belief  that  life  in  this  earth  corresponds 


A  New  Theory  of  Life  in  other  Worlds.    65 

* 

with  a  period  special  for  the  universe  itself — is  as  monstrous 
as  the  old  belief  that  our  earth  is  the  centre  of  the  universe. 
It  is,  in  fact,  a  belief  which  bears  precisely  the  same  rela- 
tion to  time  that  the  last-mentioned  belief  bears  to  space. 
According  to  one  belief,  the  minute  space  occupied  by  our 
earth  was  regarded  as  the  central  and  most  important  part 
of  all  space,  and  the  only  part  which  the  Creator  had 
specially  in  His  plans,  so  to  speak,  in  creating  the  uni- 
verse ;  according  to  the  other,  the  minute  time  occupied 
by  the  existence  of  life  on  the  earth  is  the  central  and 
most  important  part  of  all  time,  and  the  only  part  during 
which  the  Creator  intended  that  living  creatures  should 
exist  anywhere.  Both  ideas  are  equally  untenable, 
though  one  only  has  been  formally  discarded. 

This  present  time,  then,  is  a  random  selection,  so  to 
speak,  regarded  with  reference  to  the  existence  of  life  in 
any  other  world,  and  being  a  random  selection,  it  is  much 
more  likely  to  belong  to  the  period  when  there  is  no  life 
there.  Let  me  illustrate  my  meaning  by  an  example. 
Suppose  I  know  that  a  friend  of  mine,  living  at  a  distance, 
will  be  at  home  for  six  minutes  exactly,  some  time  between 
noon  and  ten  on  any  given  day,  but  that  I  have  no  means 
of  forming  any  opinion  as  to  when  the  six  minutes  will  be. 
Then,  if  at  any  given  moment,  say  at  three,  I  ask  myself 
the  question,  '  Is  my  friend  at  home  ? '  although  I  cannot 
know,  I  can  form  an  opinion  as  to  the  probability  of  his 
being  so.  There  are  six  hundred  minutes  between  noon 
and  ten  and  he  is  to  be  at  home  only  six  minutes,  or  the 
one-hundredth  part  of  the  time, — accordingly,  the  chance 


66  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

« 

that  he  is  at  home  is  one  in  a  hundred,  or  speaking  in  a 
general  way  it  is  much  more  likely  that  he  is  not  at  home 
than  that  he  is.  And  so  precisely  with  any  given  planet, 
apart  from  any  evidence  we  may  have  as  to  its  condition, 
—what  we  know  about  life  on  our  eaith  teaches  us  that 
the  probability  is  exceedingly  minute  that  that  planet  is 
inhabited.  The  argument  is  the  favourite  argument  from 
analogy.  Thus  :  life  on  our  earth  lasts  but  a  very  short 
time  compared  with  the  duration  of  the  earth's  existence ; 
therefore  life  in  any  given  planet  lasts  but  a  very 
short  time  compared  with  the  planet's  existence  ;  ac- 
cordingly, the  probability  that  that  planet  is  inhabited 
at  this  present  moment  of  time  is  exceedingly  small,  being, 
?nfact,  as  the  number  of  years  of  life  to  the  number  of 
years  without  life,  or  as  one  chance  in  many  hundreds  at 
the  least. 

This  applies  to  the  planets  of  our  solar  system  only  in 
so  far  as  we  are  ignorant  of  their  condition.  "We  may 
know  enough  about  some  of  them  to  infer  either  a  much 
higher  probability  that  life  exists,  or  almost  certainly  that 
life  cannot  exist  Thus  we  may  view  the  condition  of 
Venus  or  Mars  as  perchance  not  differing  so  greatly  from 
that  of  our  earth  as  to  preclude  the  probability  that  many 
forms  of  life  may  exist  on  those  planets.  Or  on  the  other 
hand,  we  may  believe  from  what  we  know  about  Jupiter 
and  Saturn  that  both  these  planets  are  still  passing  through 
the  fiery  stages  which  belong  to  the  youth  of  planet  life  ; 
while  in  our  moon  we  may  see  a  world  long  since  decrepit, 
and  now  utterly  unfit  to  support  any  forms  of  animated 


A  New  Theory  of  Life  in  other  Worlds.    67 

existence.  But  even  in  the  case  of  our  solar  system, 
though  the  evidence  in  some  cases  against  the  possibility 
of  life  is  exceedingly  strong,  we  do  not  meet  with  a  single 
instance  in  which  evidence  of  the  contrary  kind  is  forcible, 
still  less  decisive.  So  that  in  the  solar  system  the 
evidence  is  almost  as  clear  in  favour  of  the  conclusion 
above  indicated  as  where  we  reason  about  worlds  of 
whose  actual  condition  we  know  nothing.  As  respects 
such  worlds, — that  is,  as  respects  the  members  of  those 
systems  of  worlds  which  circle,  as  we  believe  (from 
analogy),  around  other  suns  than  ours, — the  probability 
that  any  particular  world  is  inhabited  at  this  present  time 
is  exceedingly  small. 

But  let  us  next  consider  what  is  the  probability  that 
there  is  life  on  some  member  or  other  of  a  scheme  of  worlds 
circling  around  any  given  sun.  Here,  again,  the  argument  is 
from  analogy,  being  derived  from  what  we  have  learned  or 
consider  probable  in  the  case  of  our  own  system.  And  I 
think  we  may  adopt  as  probable  some  such  view  as  I 
shall  now  present.  Each  planet,  according  to  its  dimen- 
sions, has  a  certain  length  of  planetary  life,  the  youth  and 
age  of  which  include  the  following  eras : — a  sunlike  state;  a 
state  like  that  of  Jupiter  or  Saturn,  when  much  heat  but 
little  light  is  evolved  ;  a  condition  like  that  of  our  earth  ; 
and  lastly,  the  stage  through  which  our  moon  is  passing, 
which  may  be  regarded  as  planetary  decrepitude.  In  each 
case  of  world-existences  the  various  stages  may  be  longer 
or  shorter,  as  the  whole  existence  is  longer  or  shorter,  so 
that  speaking  generally  the  period  of  habitability  bears 


68  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

the  same  proportion  in  each  world  to  the  whole  period  of 
its  existence ;  or  perhaps  there  is  no  such  uniform  pro- 
portion, while,  nevertheless,  there  exists  in  all  cases  that 
enormous  excess  of  the  period  when  no  life  is  possible, 
over  the  period  of  habitability.  In  either  case,  it  is 
manifest  that  regarding  the  system  as  a  whole,  now  one,  now 
another  planet  (or  more  generally,  now  one,  now  another 
member  of  the  system)  would  be  the  abode  of  life,  the 
smaller  and  shorter-lived  having  their  turn  first,  then  larger 
and  larger  members,  until  life  has  existed  on  the  mightiest 
of  the  planets,  and  even  at  length  upon  the  central  sun 
himself.  We  need  not  concern  ourselves  specially  with 
the  peculiarities  affecting  the  succession  of  life  in  the  case 
of  subordinate  systems,  or  of  the  members  of  the  asteroidal 
family,  or  in  other  cases  where  we  have  little  real 
knowledge  to  guide  us :  the  general  conclusion  remains 
the  same,  that  life  would  appear  successively  in  planet 
after  planet,  step  by  step  from  the  smaller  to  the  larger, 
until  the  approach  of  the  last  scene  of  all,  when  life  would 
have  passed  from  all  the  planets,  and  our  sun  would  alone 
remain  to  be  in  due  time  inhabited,  and  then  in  turn  to 
pass  (by  time-intervals  to  us  practically  infinite)  to 
decrepitude  and  death. 

During  all  this  progression,  the  intervals  without  life 
would  in  all  probability  be  far  longer  than  those  when  one 
or  other  planet  was  inhabited.  In  fact,  the  enormous 
excess  of  the  lifeless  periods  for  our  earth  over  the  period 
of  habitability,  renders  the  conclusion  all  but  certain  that 
the  lifeless  gaps  in  the  history  of  the  solar  system  must 


A  New  Theory  of  Life  in  other  Worlds.    69 

last  very  much  longer  than  the  periods  of  life  (in  this  or 
that  planet)  with  which  they  would  alternate. 

If  we  apply  this  conclusion  to  the  case  of  any  given 
star  or  sun  with  its  scheme  of  dependent  worlds,  we  see 
that  even  for  a  solar  system  so  selected  at  random  the 
probability  of  the  existence  of  life  is  small.  It  is,  of  course, 
greater  than  for  a  single  world  taken  at  random ; — -just  as 
if  I  had  ten  friends  who  were  to  be  at  home  each  for  six 
minutes  between  noon  and  ten,  the  chance  would  be 
greater  that  some  one  of  the  number  would  be  at  home  at 
a  given  moment  of  that  interval  than  would  be  the  chance 
that  a  given  one  of  the  number  would  be  then  at  home  ; 
while  yet  even  taking  all  the  ten  it  would  still  be  more 
likely  than  not  that  at  that  moment  not  one  would  be  at 
home. 

Thus  when  we  look  at  any  star,  we  may  without 
improbability  infer  that  at  the  moment  that  star  is  not 
supporting  life  in  any  one  of  those  worlds  which  probably 
circle  round  it. 

Have  we  then  been  led  to  the  Whewellite  theory  that 
our  earth  is  the  sole  abode  of  life  ?  Far  from  it.  For  not 
only  have  we  adopted  a  method  of  reasoning  which 
teaches  us  to  regard  every  planet  in  existence,  every  moon, 
every  sun,  every  orb  in  fact  in  space,  as  having  its  period 
as  the  abode  of  life,  but  the  very  argument  from  probability 
which  leads  us  to  regard  any  given  sun  as  not  the  centre 
of  a  scheme  in  which  at  this  moment  there  is  life,  forces 
upon  us  the  conclusion  that  among  the  millions  on 
millions,  nay,  the  millions  of  millions  of  suns  which 


70  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

people  space,  millions  have  orbs  circling  round  them 
which  are  at  this  present  time  the  abode  of  living 
creatures.  If  the  chance  is  one  in  a  thousand  in  the  case 
of  each  particular  star,  then  in  the  whole  number  (practi- 
cally infinite)  of  stars,  one  in  a  thousand  has  life  in  the 
system  which  it  rules  over :  and  what  is  this  but  saying 
that  millions  of  stars  are  life-supporting  orbs  ?  There  is 
then  an  infinity  of  life  around  us,  although  we  recognise 
infinity  of  time  as  well  as  infinity  of  space  as  an  attribute 
of  the  existence  of  life  in  the  universe.  And  remembering 
that  as  life  in  each  individual  is  finite,  in  each  planet 
finite,  in  each  solar  system  finite,  and  in  each  system  of 
stars  finite,  so  (to  speak  of  no  higher  orders)  the  infinity 
of  life  itself  demonstrates  the  infinity  of  barrenness,  the 
infinity  of  habitable  worlds  implies  the  infinity  of  worlds 
not  as  yet  habitable,  or  which  have  long  since  passed 
their  period  of  inhabitability.  Yet  is  there  no  waste, 
whether  of  time,  of  space,  of  matter,  or  of  force  ;  for  waste 
implies  a  tending  towards  a  limit,  and  therefore  of  these 
infinities,  which  are  without  limits,  there  can  be  no  waste. 


A   MISSING    COMET. 

MANY  persons  were  alarmed  in  August  1872  lest  it  should 
be  true  (as  reported)  that  Plantamour,  the  Swiss  astrono- 
mer, had  predicted  the  earth's  destruction  by  a  comet  on 
the  twelfth  of  that  month.  When  once  a  prediction  of 
this  sort  has  been  announced,  it  is  almost  impossible  to 
remove  the  impression  produced  by  it.  The  reputed 
author  of  the  prediction  may  deny  flatly  that  he  had  ever 
announced  even  the  approach  of  a  comet ;  every  astrono- 
mer of  repute  may  add  his  testimony  to  the  effect  that  no 
comet  is  due  at  the  time  indicated  for  the  earth's 
destruction ;  the  way  in  which  the  mistake  arose  may  be 
explained,  and  every  effort  made  to  spread  the  explanation 
as  widely  as  possible :  yet  the  impression  will  neverthe- 
less remain  that  there  must  have  been  some  ground  for 
the  prediction,  or — if  it  be  insisted  that  no  prediction 
was  made — then  there  must  have  been  some  ground  for 
the  story  of  the  prediction.  Confidence  is  not  completely 
restored  until  the  day  and  hour  announced  for  the  earth's 
destruction  have  passed  without  mishap.* 

*  Being  at  Sheffield  in  October  1872,  I  was  told  an  excellent  story 
about  the  comet.  The  story  has  the  advantage  over  most  others  of  the 
kind,  of  being  strictly  true  : — In  a  certain  house,  in  Sheffield,  Monday, 
August  12,  had  been  appointed  a  great  washing-day.  On  the  morning 


72  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

A  striking  illustration  of  the  proneness  of  men  to 
believe  in  astronomical  predictions  of  the  earth's  destruc- 
tion, was  afforded  by  a  circumstance  in  the  history  of  a 
comet,  which  has  since  given  trouble  to  astronomers  in 
another  way.  The  "  missing  comet,"  about  which  I  now 
propose  to  speak,  has  been  in  its  day  a  source  of  terror 
to  the  nations. 

About  forty  years  ago,  it  was  widely  announced  that 
astronomers  were  on  the  watch  for  a  comet  whose  path 
approaches  very  closely  to  the  earth's — in  fact,  within  the 
astronomically  minute  distance  of  20,000  miles,  or 
thereabouts.  Immediately  the  news  spread  that  the  earth 
was  to  be  destroyed.  A  comet  must  be  small  indeed 
which  has  not  a  head  more  than  forty  or  fifty  thousand 
miles  in  diameter — so  that  the  coming  comet  might  be 
expected  to  extend  far  beyond  the  20,000  miles  separating 
its  track  from  the  earth's.  The  terrible  head  of  the  comet 
would  therefore  envelop  the  earth,  and  either  the  earth 
would  be  dissolved  with  fervent  heat,  or  else,  perhaps, 
drowned  by  a  second  flood.  Even  if  the  earth  escaped 
either  form  of  destruction,  the  shock  of  the  collision  would 
destroy  every  living  creature  on  her  surface.  Nay, 

of  the  day,  the  housekeeper  asked  for  an  interview  with  her  master  on 
the  subject  of  the  comet.  She  begged  to  know  if  it  were  really  true 
that  the  world  was  to  be  destroyed  on  that  day.  Receiving  assurances 
to  the  contrary,  she  expressed  some  degree  of  satisfaction  :  "but  sir," 
she  said,  "  though  what  you  say  may  be  very  true,  might  it  not  be 
just  as  well  to  put  off  the  washing  till  to-morrow  ? "  Whether  she 
thought  a  washing-day  unsuitable  for  the  comet's  visit,  or  that  a  good 
cleaning-up  would  be  desirable  on  the  day  after  the  visit,  deponent 
sayeth  not. 


A  Missing  Comet.  73 

granting  even — though  many  were  too  frightened  to  admit 
the  possibility — that  a  coinet  is  but  a  thin  luminous 
vapour,  was  it  not  all  but  certain  that  this  vapour,  per- 
meating our  atmosphere,  would  asphyxiate  men  and 
animals  ? 

Astronomers  were  rather  surprised  at  the  interpretation 
put  upon  their  prediction.  They  were  tolerably  well 
assured  that  the  comet  would  cross  the  earth's  track  very 
nearly  at  the  time  indicated  ;  but  they  had  said  nothing 
about  the  earth's  encountering  the  comet.  In  fact,  they 
had  announced  that  the  comet  would  at  the  end  of  October 
cross  the  part  of  the  earth's  track  which  she  traverses  at 
the  end  of  November.  The  fears  of  a  collision  were  as 
absurd  as  would  be  the  fears  of  passengers  by  a  certain 
train,  who  should  be  in  terror  of  their  lives  because 
nother  train  was  to  cross  their  line  at  a  certain  point,  an 
hour  before  they  reached  that  point.  But  it  was 
useless  for  astronomers  to  point  out  that  the  intersection 
of  two  paths  did  not  imply  the  collision  of  bodies  follow- 
ing those  paths.*  The  alarm  having  once  been  sounded, 
no  reasoning  would  allay  the  fears  of  the  general  public. 

*  It  is  rather  singular  that  mistakes  should  be  made  in  a  matter 
seemingly  so  obvious, — and  not  only  by  the  ignorant,  but  by  well 
educated  persons.  Thus,  in  one  of  Cooper's  novels  (I  forget  which  at 
the  moment,  but  have  an  impression  that  it  is  the  "  Pathfinder," — it  is 
one  of  those  in  which  Leatherstockings,  alias  Hawkeye,  appears  as  a 
young  man),  a  shooting  contest  is  elaborately  described,  in  which  the 
great  feat  of  all  depends  on  precisely  such  a  mistake  as  was  made  about 
the  comet  of  1832.  The  young  marksman  (not  yet  called  Hawkeye) 
succeeds  in  all  the  trials  of  skill,  until  only  he  and  a  rival  in  the 
heroine's  affections  are  left  in  the  contest.  Then  the  great  trial  is  made. 
Two  persons,  standing  some  distance  apart,  throw  each  a  potato,  in 


74  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

Nay,  some,  who  understood  that  the  earth  herself  woT:JJ. 
not  come  into  collision  with  the  comet,  were  in  dread  Jest 
the  earth's  orbit  should  suffer ! 

"Even  among  those,"  says  Guillemin,  "who  placed 
confidence  in  the  precision  of  astronomical  calculations 
there  were  some  who  at  least  feared  a  derangement  of 
our  orbit.  Doubtless  to  them  an  orbit  was  something 
material, — a  metallic  circle,  for  example ;  '  as  if,'  says 
Arago,  in  relating  this  curious  notion,  'the  form  of  the 
path  in  which  a  bomb  after  leaving  a  mortar  traverses 
space  was  dependent  on  the  number  and  positions  of  the 
paths  which  other  bombs  had  formerly  described  in  the 
same  region. ' ' 

It  is  rather  singular  that  the  very  comet  which  thus 
nspired  an  altogether  groundless  fear,  should  have  supplied 
the  most  striking  evidence  astronomers  have  ever  obtained 
respecting  the  insignificance  of  the  effects  which  may  be 
expected  to  follow  from  the  collision  of  a  planet  with  a 
comet.  Biela's  comet — or  Gambart's  as  the  French 
astronomers  call  it — has  not  merely  been  broken  up  under 

such  a  way  that  the  two  paths,  as  seen  by  the  marksman,  intersect,  and 
the  marksman  is  to  fire  so  as  to  hit  both  potatoes.  The  favoured  lover 
succeeds,  but  the  future  Hawkeye  generously  misses.  Afterwards, 
however,  to  show  the  heroine  that  he  also  could  have  accomplished  the 
impossible  feat,  he  accomplishes  another.  He  invites  her  attention  to 
two  birds  high  overhead,  and  travelling  on  converging  paths ;  and 
offers  to  kill  the  two  with  a  single  bullet.  The  birds  obligingly  con- 
sent to  this  arrangement,  and  when  their  dead  bodies  fall  at  the  feet  of 
the  maiden,  she  recognises  the  generosity  of  the  young  rifleman.  But 
not  a  word  is  said  about  the  self-sacrificing  ingenuity  of  the  birds,  or 
about  the  amazing  skill  which  the  potato-throwers  must  have  acquired 
to  render  the  other  feat  a  possibility. 


A  Missing  Comet.  75 

the  very  eyes  of  astronomers,  and  in  a  region  of  space 
where  no  masses  of  any  importance  can  have  encountered 
it,  but  since  that  time  it  has  been  so  far  dissipated, — no 
one  knows  how, — that  the  most  powerful  telescopes  have 
failed  to  show  the  comet,  even  when  its  calculated  place 
was  such  that  had  it  retained  its  former  appearance  it 
would  have  been  visible  to  the  naked  eye. 

The  history  of  Biela's  comet  has  been  singularly  inter- 
esting throughout. 

The  comet  may  be  said  to  have  been  discovered  when 
Biela,  in  February  1826,  first  observed  it  in  Aries  ;  for  it 
was  then  only  that  the  true  nature  of  this  comet's  path 
was  recognised.  It  was  found  that  it  travels  in  an  orbit  of 
moderate  dimensions,  carrying  it  when  farthest  from  the  sun 
to  a  distance  somewhat  exceeding  that  of  the  planet  Jupiter. 
It  belongs,  indeed,  to  a  family  or  group  of  comets  distin- 
guished by  the  peculiarity  that  their  paths  pass  very  close 
to  that  of  Jupiter,  insomuch  that  the  notion  has  been 
suggested,  that  either  these  comets  have  all  been  forced 
to  take  up  their  present  paths  through  the  tremendous 
attractive  influence  of  the  giant  planet,  or  else  that  every 
one  of  them  has  been  expelled  from  Jupiter's  interior  at 
some  very  remote  epoch  ! 

So  carefully  was  Biela's  comet  observed  in  1826,  that  it 
was  found  possible  to  trace  back  the  comet's  course  through 
former  revolutions  with  sufficient  accuracy  to  determine 
whether  the  comet  had  been  before  observed.  When  this  was 
done,  it  was  found  that  the  comet  had  been  seen  on  March 
8,  1772,  by  Montaigne,  at  Limoges  ;  and  later,  up  to  April 


76  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

3,  by  Messier,  the  great  comet  hunter.*  The  comet  had 
also  been  seen  (having  returned  four  times  in  the  interval) 
by  Pons,  on  November  10,  1805.  On  this  occasion  it 
presented  a  somewhat  remarkable  appearance,  its  head 
having  an  apparent  diameter  equal  to  about  a  fourth  of 
the  moon's.  On  December  8,  the  astronomer  Olbers  saw 
it  without  a  telescope.  From  calculations  made  on  that 
occasion,  some  astronomers  were  led  to  suspect  that  this 
comet  might  be  the  same  which  Montaigne  had  seen  in 
1772 ;  but  the  art  of  calculating  cometic  orbits  had  not  then 
been  so  thoroughly  mastered  as  to  enable  any  mathema- 
tician to  speak  confidently  on  this  point.  Indeed,  at  that 
time  the  idea  was  very  generally  entertained  that  comets 
travel  for  the  most  part  in  orbits  having  enormous 
dimensions.  Only  one  instance — LexelTs  comet — had 
hitherto  been  known  to  the  contrary,  and  there  were 
excellent  reasons  for  regarding  that  instance  as  altogether 
exceptional 

In  1826,  however,  the  comet  was  too  carefully  observed 
for  any  doubts  to  be  further  entertained.  It  was  shown 
by  several  eminent  mathematicians  that  the  comet  has  a 


*  So  thoroughly  had  Messier  identified  himself  with  the  work  of 
comet-seeking,  that  all  sublunary  events  seemed  insignificant  to  him  by 
comparison.  It  is  related  of  him  that  he  was  less  troubled  at  his  wife's 
death  than  at  the  circumstance  that,  owing  to  the  interruption  to  his 
labours  which  her  illness  had  occasioned,  he  failed  to  discover  a  comet, 
a  rival  comet -seeker  gaining  that  distinction.  A  friend  met  the  dis- 
tracted widower  a  day  or  two  after  Hme.  Messier's  death,  and  expressed 
sympathy  with  him. — "Ah,"  replied  Messier,  "it  was  hard — was  it 
not  ? — that  after  all  my  watching  I  was  obliged  to  leave  my  telescope 
just  when  the  comet  came." 


A  Missing  Comet.  77 

period  of  about  six  years  and  nine  months.  Santini  and 
Damoiseau  assigned  November  27,  1832,  as  the  date  of 
this  comet's  return  to  its  point  of  nearest  approach  to  the 
sun.  Olbers  confirmed  this  result,  showing,  moreover, 
that  the  comet's  course  would  bring  it  within  20,000  miles 
of  the  earth's  path.  Eemarking  on  this,  Sir  John  Herschel 
wrote,  in  1866,  "  The  orbit  of  this  comet  very  nearly  indeed 
intersects  that  of  the  earth  on  the  place  which  the  earth 
occupies  on  or  about  the  30th  of  November.  If  ever  the 
earth  is  to  be  swallowed  up  by  a  comet,  or  to  swallow  up 
one,  it  will  be  on  or  about  that  day  of  the  year.  In  the 
year  1832  we  missed  it  by  a  month.  The  head  of  the 
comet  enveloped  that  point  of  our  orbit ;  but  this 
happened  on  the  29th  of  October,  so  that  we  escaped  that 
time.  Had  a  meeting  taken  place,  from  what  we  know  of 
comets,  it  is  probable  that  no  harm  would  have  happened, 
and  that  nobody  would  have  known  anything  about  it." 

It  is  important  to  notice  how  closely  the  calculations  of 
astronomers  agreed  with  the  observed  event  on  this,  the 
first  occasion  of  the  comet's  return  after  its  orbit  had  been 
calculated.  If  it  be  remembered  that  after  1826  the  comet 
was  out  of  sight  for  nearly  six  years,  during  all  which  time 
it  was  more  or  less  exposed  to  disturbing  attractions,  it 
will  be  admitted  that  astronomy  would  have  had  no  reason 
to  be  ashamed  if  the  comet  had  returned -to  its  point  of 
nearest  approach  to  the  sun,  within  a  week,  or  even  a 
month  of  the  appointed  time.  But  the  actual  difference 
between  the  observed  and  calculated  time  was  less  than 
twelve  hours.  To  illustrate  this  by  a  terrestrial  instance, 


78  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

the  case  is  much  as  though  an  express  train  from  Edinburgh 
should  arrive  in  London  within  a  second  of  the  appointed 
time — a  degree  of  accuracy  not  invariably  attained,  though 
the  terrestrial  engineer  has  the  power,  which  the  comet  has 
not,  of  making  up  for  lost  time. 

It  is  also  to  be  noticed,  that  at  each  return  of  a  comet, 
its  course  can  be  predicted  with  greater  accuracy ;  since 
the  error  noticed  at  any  particular  return  affords  the  means 
of  rectifying  former  calculations,  and  providing  against 
similar  error  at  future  returns.  The  reader  will  presently 
see  why  this  point  is  insisted  upon :  it  is  essential  to 
notice  the  degree  of  mastery  which  astronomers  had 
acquired,  even  so  far  back  as  ]  832,  over  the  motions  of 
this  particular  comet. 

In  1839  the  comet  returned,  but  was  not  seen,  owing  to 
the  position  of  the  sun  at  the  time  when  the  comet  was  in 
our  neighbourhood.  Throughout  its  passage  near  us,  in 
fact,  the  comet  was  lost  to  sight  in  the  splendour  of  the 
sun's  beams. 

At  the  next  return  the  comet  was  detected  very  early, — 
for  whereas  it  passed  the  point  of  its  orbit  nearest  to  the 
sun  on  February  11,  1846,  it  was  recognised,  precisely  in 
its  calculated  place,  on  November  28,  1845. 

And  now  one  of  the  most  singular  events  recorded  in 
the  history  of  comets  took  place.  In  1846,  "  all  seemed," 
says  Sir  John  Herschel,  "to  be  going  on  quietly  and 
comfortably,  when,  behold!  suddenly,  on  the  13th  of 
January,  the  comet  split  into  two  distinct  comets !  each 
with  a  head  and  coma  and  a  little  nucleus  of  its  own. 


A  Missing  Comet.  79 

There  is  some  little  contradiction  about  the  exact  date. 
Lieutenant  Maury,  of  the  United  States  Observatory  of 
Washington,  reported  officially  on  tlw  15th,  having  seen  it 
double  on  the  loth;  but  Professor  Wichmann,  wlw  saw  it 
double  on  the  15th,  avers  that  he  had  a  good  view  of  it  on 
the  14:th,  and  remarked  nothing  particular  in  its  appear- 
ance. Be  that  as  it  may,  the  comet  from  a  single  became 
a  double  one.  What  domestic  troubles  caused  the  seces- 
sion it  is  impossible  to  conjecture  ;  but  the  two  receded 
farther  and  farther  from  each  other  up  to  a  certain 
moderate  distance,  with  some  degree  of  mutual  communica- 
tion, and  a  very  odd  interchange  of  light, — one  day  one 
head  being  brighter,  and  another  the  other, — till  they 
seem  to  have  agreed  finally  to  part  company.  The  oddest 
part  of  the  story,  however,  is  yet  to  come.  The  year  1852 
brought  round  the  time  for  their  re-appearance,  and 
behold !  there  they  both  were,  at  about  the  same  distance 
from  each  other,  and  both  visible  in  one  telescope." 

The  oddest  part  of  the  story  had  not  yet  come,  however, 
when  Herschel  wrote  the  above  lines.  But,  before  passing 
on  to  relate  the  fate  of  this  comet,  it  may  be  well  to 
correct  a  few  of  the  statements  in  the  above  passage 
(presented  just  as  it  stands  in  the  original,  because  it  is  a 
good  specimen  of  Sir  John  Herschel's  more  familiar  style 
of  science-writing). 

In  the  first  place,  the  two  companion  comets  had  each 
a  tail,  as  well  as  a  head,  coma,  and  nucleus.  Then,  as  the 
object  was  passing  out  of  view  in  1846,  the  two  comets 
seemed  to  approach  each  other.  The  greatest  distance 


8o  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

between  them  was  attained  on  or  about  March  3,  1846, 
and  amounted  to  about  157,000  miles.  On  the  return  of 
the  double  comet,  in  1852,  the  distance  had  by  no  means 
remained  unchanged,  as  Herschel  states,  but  had  increased 
to  about  1,250,000  miles.  It  is  worthy  of  notice,  in 
passing,  that  Plantamour,  of  Genoa, — the  same  astronomer 
to  whom  the  prediction  of  the  world's  destruction  by  a 
comet  on  August  12,  last,  was  mistakenly  assigned, — 
calculated  the  paths  of  both  the  components,  and  the 
motions  of  the  comets  were  found  to  agree  very  closely 
with  his  results  during  the  whole  time  that  the  comets 
continued  visible. 

In  1858,  the  comet  probably  returned ;  but,  as  in  1839, 
the  part  of  the  heavens  traversed  by  it  was  too  close  to  the 
sun's  place  to  permit  the  comet  to  be  seen,  I  say  that 
the  comet  probably  returned ;  because  we  know  that  in 
1852  it  safely  traversed  the  part  of  space  where  it  had 
formerly  divided,  and  passed  from  the  sun's  neighbourhood 
towards  the  outer  parts  of  its  orbit,  apparently  unscathed. 
But  what  happened  to  the  comet  during  its  passage  past 
the  sun  in  1859  is  not  known.  It  will  presently  be  seen 
that  in  all  probability  the  comet  was  then  destroyed  or 
dissipated  in  some  way.  In  fact,  it  is  manifest  that  the 
same  reason  which  leads  us  to  believe  that  the  comet 
returned  in  1859,  would  lead  us  to  believe,  that  if  it  had 
passed  away  again  uninjured,  it  would  have  been  seen  at 
the  next  return,  or  in  1866.  But  1866  came ;  the  path  of 
the  comet  was  assigned ;  astronomers  looked  forward  with 
interest  to  its  reappearance,  eager  to  see  how  far  the  two 


A  Missing  Comet.  81 

component  comets  had  separated  from  each  other ; —  and 
no  comet  appeared  !  Telescopes  of  great  power,  and  of 
exquisite  defining  qualities,  swept  the  whole  track  on 
which  the  comet  was  to  have  travelled ;  nor  were  the 
neighbouring  regions  of  the  heavens  left  unexplored ;  but 
not  a  trace  of  the  comet  could  anywhere  be  seen.  There 
was  not  the  slightest  room  for  questioning  the  accuracy 
of  the  calculations  by  which  the  path  had  been  predicted. 
Astronomers  were  certain  that  if  undestroyed  or  undissi- 
pated  the  comet  would  follow  the  assigned  path, — as 
certain  as  a  station-master  would  be  that  a  train  would 
enter  a  station  along  the  line  of  rails  assigned  to  it,  unless 
some  accident  or  mistake  should  occur.  Now  comets 
do  not  make  mistakes  ;  but,  as  we  now  see,  they  are  not 
free  from  the  risk  of  accidents.  This  comet  had  already 
met  with  an  accident,  being  broken  by  some  mischance 
into  two  parts  under  the  very  eyes  of  astronomers. 
Probably  in  1859  it  met  with  further  misfortunes,  visible 
mayhap  to  astronomers  in  Venus  or  Mercury.  At  any 
rate,  something  had  happened  to  the  comet  since  its 
retreat  in  1852.  "It  is  now,"  wrote  Sir  J.  Herschel  at 
the  time  (Feb.  1866),  "overdue!  Its  orbit  has  been 
recomputed,  and  an  ephemeris  "  (that  is,  an  account  of  its 
motion  from  hour  to  hour)  "calculated.  Astronomers 
have  been  eagerly  looking  out  for  its  reappearance  for  the 
last  two  months,  when,  according  to  all  former  experience, 
it  ought  to  have  been  conspicuously  visible — but  without 
success !  giving  rise  to  the  strangest  theories.  At  all 
events,  it  seems  to  have  fairly  disappeared,  and  that  with- 


82  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

out  any  such  excuse  as  in  the  case  of  Lex  ell's,  viz.,  the 
preponderant  attraction  of  some  great  planet.  Can  it 
have  come  into  contact  or  exceedingly  close  approach  to 
some  asteroid  as  yet  undiscovered ;  or,  peradventure, 
plunged  into,  and  got  bewildered  among,  the  ring  of 
meteorolites,  which  astronomers  more  than  suspect  ?" 

Both  these  explanations  seem  at  a  first  view  available. 
Biela's  comet  had  a  course  carrying  it  through  the  outskirts 
of  the  zone  of  minor  planets ;  and  there  was  nothing  what- 
ever to  prevent  the  comet  from  coming  into  collision  with 
one  of  these  bodies,  or  else  approaching  so  nearly  as  to  be 
greatly  disturbed,  and  to  travel  thereafter  on  a  different 
orbit.  But  an  objection  exists  which  Sir  J.  Herschel  does 
not  seem  to  have  noticed.  When  the  comet  retired  in 
1852  it  consisted  of  two  distinct  comets,  separated  by  an 
intervening  space  of  about  1,250,000  miles.  Now  it  would 
be  a  singular  chance  which  should  bring  one  of  these 
comets  into  collision  with  a  minor  planet,  or  so  near  as  to 
occasion  an  important  disturbance.  But  supposing  this 
to  happen,  then  the  fellow-comet,  not  travelling  in  the 
wake  of  the  first,  but  side  by  side,  would  certainly  have 
escaped.  For  it  must  be  remembered,  that  although 
1,250,000  miles  is  a  very  small  distance  indeed  by  com- 
parison with  the  dimensions  of  the  solar  system,  it  is  an 
enormous  distance  compared  with  the  dimensions  of  the 
minor  planets, — some  of  which  have  a  surface  not  much 
greater  than  that  of  an  English  county.  The  minor  planet 
occasioning  the  comet's  disturbance  would  presumably  be 
one  of  the  smallest,  since  it  has  not  yet  been  detected,  and 


A  Missing  Comet.  83 

the  newly  discovered  minor  planets  are  on  the  average 
much  smaller  than  those  first  detected.  Now,  the  earth 
herself  would  have  no  very  marked  influence  on  a  comet 
or  meteor  passing  her  at  a  distance  of  1,250,000  miles ;  for 
it  is  to  be  remembered,  that  the  comet  as  well  as  the  earth 
would  have  an  enormously  rapid  motion,  and  the  disturbing 
power  of  the  earth  would  therefore  only  act  for  a  short 
time.  But  a  minor  planet — even  the  largest  of  the 
family, — would  not  have  the  twenty -thousandth  part  of 
the  earth's  power*  to  disturb  a  passing  comet.  At  a 
distance  of  200,000  miles,  a  comet  would  pass  such  an 
asteroid  without  any  marked  disturbance  of  its  motions. 

Of  course  it  is  not  absolutely  impossible  that  one  of  the 
comets  of  the  pair  should  have  been  encountered  by  one 
minor  planet,  and  the  other  by  another ;  but  the  improba- 
bility against  such  a  contingency  is  so  great  that  we  need 
scarcely  entertain  the  idea  even  as  a  bare  possibility. 

"We  are  left  then  to  the  supposition  that  the  comet  was 
destroyed  or  dissipated  by  meteoric  streams.  It  is  at 
once  seen  that  this  theory  is  at  least  more  consistent  with 
observed  facts  than  the  other.  The  comet  had  been  seen 
to  divide  into  two  parts  in  a  portion  of  the  solar  system, 
where  certainly  no  bodies  but  meteorites  can  be  supposed 


*  It  is  probable  that  the  largest  of  the  minor  planets — Vesta— has  a 
diameter  of  rather  more  than  200  miles,  or  at  the  outside  say  260  miles 
— the  thirtieth  part  of  the  earth's  diameter.  Thus,  assuming  Vesta  to 
have  the  same  density  as  the  earth  (whereas,  being  smaller,  she  pro- 
bably is  very  much  less  compressed),  we  get  for  her  mass  (or,  which  is 
the  same  thing,  her  attractive  power)  the  27,000th  part  of  the  earth's — 
obtaining  the  number  27,000  by  multiplying  30  twice  into  itself. 


84  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

to  travel.  It  seems  reasonable  to  suppose,  that  on  that 
occasion  the  head  of  the  coinet  had  come  right  upon  some 
group  of  meteors,  and  so  had  divided  as  a  stream  of  water 
divides  against  a  rock.  Assuming  this,  we  find  reason  for 
believing  that  the  track  of  this  comet  crosses  a  rich  meteor- 
region.  The  particular  group  which  had  caused  the  division 
of  the  comet  would  of  course  pass  away,  and  would  not 
probably  come  again  in  the  comet's  way  for  many  years 
or  even  centuries.  But  another  group  belonging  to  the 
same  system  might  in  its  turn  encounter  the  comet,  and 
complete  the  process  of  dissipation  which  the  former  had 
commenced.  On  this  theory,  the  distance  between  the 
companion  comets  would  introduce  no  difficulty.  For  not 
only  is  it  quite  a  common  circumstance  for  meteoric 
systems  to  have  a  range  of  several  millions  of  miles,*  but 
— a  much  more  important  consideration — both  the  comets 
would  be  bound  to  return  to  the  scene  of  the  former  en- 
counter. It  was  there  that  each  had  been  sent  off  on  a 
new  track  ;  but  each  new  track  started  from  there,  and 
therefore  each  new  track  must  pass  through  there. 

So  that  it  seems  far  from  improbable  that,  if  the  comets 
could  have  been  watched  during  their  return  in  1859,  they 
would  have  been  seen  to  travel  onwards  towards  the  place 
where  they  had  originally  separated  ;  as  they  approached 
that  place,  it  would  have  been  perceived  that  they  drew 
nearer  together,  though  they  would  not  reach  that  point 
at  the  same  moment;  f  and  then  each  in  turn  would  have 

*  See  the  paper  on  meteors  in  the  "  Expanse  of  Heaven." 

+  Of  course  in  an  article  intended  like  the  present  for  general  reading, 


A  Missing  Comet.  85 

appeared  to  grow  more  and  more  diffuse  as  the  encounter 
with  the  meteor-group  proceeded,  until  first  one  and  then 
the  other  would  have  vanished  altogether  from  view. 

It  may  be  asked,  whether  any  circumstances  in  the 
history  of  comets  seem  to  show  that  comets  really  are 
exposed  to  dissipation  in  this  way.  To  this  the  reply  is, 
that  although  Biela's  is  the  only  comet  which  has  heen 
seen  to  divide  into  parts  in  modern  times,  or  under  tele- 
scopic scrutiny,  yet  history  records  more  than  one  instance 
of  a  similar  kind, — and  that  too  in  the  case  of  distinguished 
comets,  not  mere  telescopic  light-clouds  such  as  Biela's. 
The  following  passage  from  Grant's  noble  work,  "The 
History  of  Physical  Astronomy,"  gives  nearly  all  that  is 
known  on  this  point,  though  some  Chinese  records  might 
be  added  did  space  permit: — "Seneca  relates  that  Ephorus, 
an  ancient  Greek  author,  makes  mention  of  a  comet  which, 
before  vanishing,  was  seen  to  divide  itself  into  two  distinct 
bodies.  The  Roman  philosopher  appears  to  doubt  the 
possibility  of  such  a  fact ;  but  Kepler,  with  characteristic 
sagacity,  has  remarked  that  its  actual  occurrence  was 
exceedingly  probable.  The  latter  astronomer  further 
remarked,  that  there  were  some  grounds  for  supposing  that 
two  comets,  which  appeared  in  the  same  region  of  the 


it  is  not  possible  to  enter  at  length  into  all  the  considerations  which 
have  to  be  attended  to  in  an  exact  inquiry  into  the  motions  of  two  comets 
after  separation.  It  will  be  sufficient  to  point  out  that,  unless  the 
collision  which  caused  the  separation  left  the  velocity  of  each  exactly 
equal—  a  wholly  unlikely  supposition — they  would  return  to  the  scene 
of  collision  at  different  epochs.  The  increased  distance  between  them 
in  1852  showed  that  this  was  actually  the  case. 


86  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

heavens  in  the  year  1618  were  the  fragments  of  a  comet 
that  had  experienced  a  similar  dissolution.  Hevelius 
states,  that  Cysatus  perceived  in  the  head  of  the  great 
comet  of  1618  unequivocal  symptoms  of  a  breaking  up  of 
the  body  into  distinct  fragments.  The  comet,  when  first 
seen  in  the  month  of  November,  appeared  like  a  round 
mass  of  concentrated  light  On  the  8th  of  December  it 
seemed  to  be  divided  into  several  parts.  On  the  20th  of 
the  same  month  it  resembled  a  multitude  of  small  stars. 
Hevelius  states,  that  he  himself  witnessed  a  similar  appear- 
ance in  the  head  of  the  comet  of  1661." 

It  is,  of  course,  always  possible  that  the  destruction  or 
dissipation  of  a  comet  may  be  due,  not  to  any  collision, 
but  to  that  action  (whatever  may  be  its  nature)  by  which 
the  sun  seems,  after  rousing  and  disturbing  the  matter  of 
a  comet's  head,  to  repel  a  part  of  this  matter  in  such  sort 
as  to  form  a  tail,  or  two  or  more  tails.  Indeed,  it  is  worthy 
of  notice  that  before  its  division  into  two  comets,  Biela's 
comet  had  shown  two  distinct  tail-like  appendages ;  and 
possibly,  if  the  comet  could  have  been  constantly  watched 
it  would  have  been  found  that  these  two  appendages  re- 
solved themselves  eventually  into  the  two  tails  of  two 
distinct  comets. 

Professor  Grant  adopts  this  view  of  the  matter.  He 
says,  "  it  is  impossible  to  doubt  that  the  division  of  Biela's 
comet  arose  from  the  divellent  action  of  the  sun,  whatever 
may  have  been  the  mode  of  operation."  But  I  must  admit, 
that  I  find  it  quite  possible  to  doubt  whether  this  is  indeed 
the  true  solution  of  the  difficulty.  One  can  understand 


A  Missing  Comet.  87 

how  two  distinct  tails  might  be  expelled  or  repelled  from  a 
single  head ;  but  it  is  not  so  easy  to  see  how  two  complete 
comets  could  be  formed  out  of  one  in  this  way,  nothing 
apparently  remaining.  To  make  clear  the  nature  of  this 
reasoning,  I  remind  the  reader  that  a  comet's  tail  is  either 
formed  out  of  the  head  (according  to  Sir  J.  Herschel's 
theory),  or  else  is  formed  through  a  certain  action  exerted  by 
the  head  (according  to  Prof.  Tyndall's).  In  the  former  case, 
the  process  never  (so  far  as  observation  extends)  results  in 
completely  using  up  the  head  ;  in  the  latter,  very  obviously, 
the  head  must  remain,  or  the  action  would  cease.  In 
either  case,  then,  the  head  would  remain.  So  that  when 
two  tails  were  formed  they  would  extend  from  one  and 
the  same  head.  The  head  cannot  be  made  double  by  the 
same  process  which  produces  the  double  tail.  There  must 
be  some  distinct  action  on  the  head  to  produce  such  a 
result.  Now  the  tails,  after  they  are  formed,  might  have 
the  power  of  drawing  away  each  its  own  share  of  the 
original  head ;  but  the  supposition  seems  rather  a  wild  one. 
On  the  contrary,  the  supposition  that  the  comet  may  have 
divided  upon  a  meteoric  group  involves  nothing  which  is 
not  in  accordance  with  known  facts,  since  such  meteoric 
groups  exist  in  countless  numbers  within  the  interplanetary 
spaces. 

It  is  certainly  unsafe,  however,  to  dogmatise  upon  this 
difficult  subject  in  the  present  state  of  our  knowledge. 

"Whatever  may  have  been  the  cause  of  this  comet's 
dissipation,  it  would  seem  to  admit  of  no  possibility  of 
question  that  the  comet  has  been  finally  and  completely 


88  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

removed  from  the  list  of  existing  comets.  Of  course,  it 
has  not  been  absolutely  destroyed ;  its  fragments  exist 
somewhere  :  but,  as  a  comet,  it  has  ceased  to  exist.  If  it 
had  continued  unchanged,  it  would  have  been  again  in 
view,  and  on  the  whole  under  favourable  circumstances, 
during  October  in  the  present  year  (1872).  Prepared  to  find 
it  much  fainter  than  of  yore,  or  its  fragments  more  widely 
dispersed,  astronomers  searched  for  it  with  more  care  than 
in  1866,  not  only  using  more  powerful  instruments,  but 
extending  their  search  over  a  wider  range.  But  the 
comet  was  not  found.  At  the  next  return,  its  path  would 
bring  it  too  near  to  the  sun  for  astronomers  to  observe  it, 
even  though  it  retained  its  original  brightness.  We  may 
assume  that  the  process  of  dissipation  and  dispersion  has 
been  all  this  time  in  progress.  And  therefore  it  is  im- 
possible to  hope  that  a  trace  of  the  comet  will  be  recognised 
in  1880, — when  it  would  again  have  passed  into  view  but 
for  the  misfortunes  which  have  befallen  it. 

This  being  the  case,  my  readers  perhaps  will  be  surprised 
to  hear  that  in  a  few  days  from  the  appearance  of  these 
lines  (Nov.  1,  1872),  astronomers  expect  to  see  certain 
fragments  of  debris  of  this  very  comet.  This,  however,  is 
actually  the  case.  Since  the  year  1798,  there  have  appeared 
from  time  to  time,  early  in  December,  certain  meteors  or 
falling  stars  which  follow  a  track  closely  according  with  the 
path  of  Biela's  comet.  There  is  not  a  perfect  agreement ; 
but  Dr  Weiss,  a  German  astronomer,  has  shewn  that  the 
actual  path  of  the  meteors  corresponds  almost  perfectly  with 
that  of  a  comet  which  appeared  in  1818,  and  which  there  is 


A  Missing  Comet.  89 

now  excellent  reason  for  regarding  as  itself  a  fragment  of 
Bielas  comet.  Now,  between  November  25  and  December 
5,  the  earth  will  be  passing  through  the  broad  tracks  of  both 
these  comets,  or — regarding  Biela's  as  two — through  the 
tracks  of  these  three  comets,  and  so  closely  behind  Biela's 
pair,  that  we  may  fairly  expect  to  see  many  meteors  dur- 
ing that  week.  Precisely  as,  in  November  1866,  there 
was  a  splendid  display  of  November  meteors,  following  on 
the  track  of  Tempel's  comet  (which  had  passed  early  in 
1866),  so  this  year  there  will  probably  be  a  display  of 
meteors  following  the  track  of  Biela's  comet,  which,  though 
unseen,  must  have  crossed  the  earth's  path  about  the 
middle  of  October.  At  any  rate,  the  skies  should  be 
carefully  watched.  The  shower  of  meteors  (should  any 
occur)  will  fall  in  such  a  direction  that  shooting-stars 
might  be  looked  for  at  any  hour  of  the  night.  And  those 
belonging  to  Biela's  comet  could  be  very  readily  dis- 
tinguished from  others,  because  their  tracks  would  seem  to 
radiate  from  the  constellation  Cassiopeia.  So  that  should 
any  of  my  readers  observe,  on  any  night  between  Novem- 
ber 25  and  December  5,  a  shooting-star  following  such  a 
track,  he  will  have  the  satisfaction  of  knowing  that  in  all 
probability  he  has  seen  a  fragment  or  follower  of  a  comet 
which  has  divided  into  two  if  not  three  distinct  comets, 
and  has  followed  up  that  process  of  dissipation  by  dissolv- 
ing altogether  away. 

It  is  not  easy  to  form  an  opinion  as  to  the  actual  pro- 
bability that  a  fine  display  of  meteors  will  be  seen.  This 
particular  meteor  system  has,  however,  been  known  to 


9O  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

produce  somewhat  remarkable  showers.  Thus  Brandes, 
who  first  recognised  the  existence  of  the  system,  counted 
no  less  than  four  hundred  meteors  in  a  few  hours,  while 
travelling  in  a  covered  carriage  on  the  night  of  December 
7,  1798. 

In  conclusion,  we  may  draw,  I  think,  from  the  history 
of  the  missing  comet  the  inference  that  our  earth  and  her 
fellow-planets  have  little  to  fear  from  collision  with 
comets.  The  earth  passes  each  year  through  more  than  a 
hundred  meteor  systems  and  yet  suffers  no  injury,  whereas 
Biela's  comet  would  seem  to  have  been  destroyed  during 
only  a  few  encounters  with  meteoric  groups.  It  appears 
evident,  then,  that  it  would  be  the  comet,  not  our  earth, 
which  would  suffer  in  any  encounter  of  the  sort.  Indeed, 
comets,  which  once  occasioned  such  dread,  seem  to  be  but 
frail  creatures.  To  quote  the  words  of  poor  Blanqui,  the 
republican, — who  wrote  in  prison  about  comets  as  if  he 
sympathised  with  them  in  their  trials, — "  if  comets  escape 
Saturn,  it  is  to  fall  under  the  stroke  of  Jupiter,  the  police- 
man of  the  solar  system.  On  duty  in  the  dark,  he  scents 
(sic)  these  hairy  nothings  (nihilites  chevelues),  before  a  ray 
makes  them  visible,  and  urges  them — distracted — towards 
perilous  passes.  There,  seized  by  heat  and  swollen  to 
monstrosity,  they  lose  their  shape,  lengthen,  disaggregate, 
and  break  confusedly  through  the  terrible  straits,  abandon- 
ing the  stragglers  everywhere,  and  only  managing  to 
regain,  with  great  difficulty,  under  the  protection  of  cold, 
their  unknown  solitudes." 


THE  LOST  COMET  AND  ITS  METEOR-TRAIN. 

THE  meteor-shower  which  occurred  on  November  27, 1872, 
and  the  circumstances  connected  with  that  event,  not 
only  attracted  a  fresh  interest  to  the  subject  of  meteoric 
astronomy,  but  afforded  important  evidence  respect- 
ing the  connection  which  undoubtedly  exists  between 
meteors  and  comets.  I  propose  in  this  paper  to  consider 
more  particularly  the  events  referred  to,  having  already  in 
the  last  essay  but  one  dealt  with  the  histoiy  of  meteoric 
and  cometic  astronomy. 

It  has  been  shown  by  the  labours  of  Schiaparelli,  Adams, 
Peters,  Tempel,  and  other  astronomers,  that  the  meteors  of 
November  13-14  (called  the  Leonides)  travel  in  the  track 
of  Tempel's  comet.  The  meteors  of  August  10-11,  or 
Perseides,  have  also  been  shown  to  travel  in  the  track  of 
a  comet.  Other  such  instances  of  association  have  been 
more  or  less  fully  recognised  ;  and  now  the  conclusion  has 
been  generally  accepted,  that  in  the  train  or  path  of  comets 
bodies  travel  in  scattered  flights,  which,  if  they  fall  on  the 
atmosphere  of  the  earth,  appear  as  shooting-stars  or 
meteors. 

Until  the  recent  shower,  however,  the  inquiries  made 
in  this  branch  of  research  had  been  limited  to  cases  of 
5 


92  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

recognised  meteor-systems  whose  orbits  have  been  found 
to  agree  with  those  of  comets.  It  was  a  new  circumstance 
in  the  history  of  meteoric  research  when  Weiss  in 
Germany,  and  Alexander  Herschel  in  England,  ventured 
to  predict  a  meteoric  display  because  the  earth  was  about 
to  pass  through  the  orbit  of  a  known  comet.  It  is  true 
that  there  were  some  reasons  for  believing  that  meteors 
which  had  fallen  in  various  years  between  November  25 
and  December  7  were  attendants  upon  the  comet  in 
question — Biela's  or  Gambart's.  But  the  evidence  was 
slight,  and  in  some  respects  unsatisfactory  ;  so  that  it  may 
be  said  that  in  reality  the  astronomers  just  named  had  no 
other  grounds  for  their  anticipations  than  first  the  fact 
that  Biela's  comet  was  known  to  have  recently  passed  the 
descending  node  of  its  orbit  (or  the  place  where  it  passes 
nearest  to  the  earth's  orbit),  and  secondly  their  confidence 
in  the  theory  that  meteors  and  comets  are  in  some  way 
associated.  A  prediction  such  as  this  became  therefore  in 
some  sense  a  crucial  test  of  this  theory — not  indeed  that 
the  failure  of  the  prediction  would  have  disproved  the 
theory  (because  negative  evidence  counts  for  little  in  this 
matter),  but  that  its  fulfilment  would  supply  the  only 
form  of  positive  evidence  yet  wanting  to  that  theory. 

I  do  not  here  enter  at  length  on  the  remarkable  circum- 
stances connected  with  Biela's  comet,  because  they  have 
been  elsewhere  stated  at  considerable  length,*  and  are 
probably  known  to  the  majority  of  those  who  will  read 
these  lines.  Let  it  suffice  to  say  that  the  comet  was  one 

*See  the  preceding  Essay. 


The  Lost  Comet  and  its  Meteor- Train.      93 

of  short  period,  returning  at  mean  intervals  of  6-G35  years  ; 
that  in  1837  it  was  observed  to  be  divided  into  two  distinct 
comets ;  that  it  returned  in  1852,  and  both  the  comets 
were  then  still  in  existence ;  that  whether  it  returned 
(unchanged  in  general  aspect)  in  1858-59  or  not,  is 
unknown,  because  its  calculated  course  was  such  as  to 
render  observation  impossible ;  and  lastly  that  in  1866, 
and  again  last  year,  it  was  searched  for  in  vain  with 
telescopes  of  great  power. 

Now  it  crossed  the  earth's  path  last  year  nearly  twelve 
weeks  before  November  27,  when  the  earth  herself 
traversed  the  place  at  which  the  comet  crosses  her  orbit. 
And  since  the  meteors  of  November  13-14  have  been  seen, 
not  merely  a  few  months,  but  several  years  after  the  nodal 
passage  of  their  comet,  it  seemed  not  unreasonable  to 
expect  a  considerable  meteoric  display  on  or  about 
November  27.  The  exact  date  was  not  indeed  very 
accurately  determined,  and  the  reason  is  readily  seen.  I 
invite  the  reader's  special  attention  to  the  point,  because 
it  has  been  somewhat  singularly  overlooked  even  by 
astronomers  of  great  mathematical  attainments.  The 
comet  itself  had  its  place  of  passage  readily  calculated, 
and  it  might  seem  at  first  sight  that  whenever  the  earth 
came  to  that  place  the  display  should  occur.  But  mani- 
festly the  position  of  the  cometic  orbit  for  November  27, 
when  the  earth  crossed  that  orbit's  node,  would  not  be 
identical  with  the  position  of  that  orbit  three  months  or 
so  before,  when  the  comet  passed  its  node.  It  might  then 
seem  that  this  latter  position  was  what  astronomers  should 


94  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

calculate,  and  as  a  matter  of  fact  this  is  what  was  commonly 
done.  We  find  the  position  of  the  node  of  the  orbit 
for  the  end  of  November  assigned  as  the  place  where  the 
encounter  of  the  earth  with  the  meteoric  flight  was  to  take 
place.  But  this  view  is  as  incorrect  as  the  former. 
Those  particular  meteors  which  were  travelling  twelve 
weeks  behind  the  head  of  the  comet,  although,  speaking 
generally,  they  would  follow  the  comet's  track,  would 
nevertheless  not  be  found  travelling  in  precisely  the  same 
orbit,  nor  would  they  cross  the  earth's  orbit  precisely 
where  the  comet's  orbit  did  at  the  time.  For  they  would 
have  been  subjected  to  perturbations  differing  notably  in 
character  from  those  which  had  affected  the  comet  itself. 
It  must  be  remembered  that  the  circumstances  which 
separated  such  meteors  by  so  great  a  distance  from  the 
head  have  not  taken  place  in  a  few  years,  in  a  few  revolu- 
tions of  the  comet,  or  even  in  a  few  centuries.  But  even 
if  we  take  only  the  last  half  century  or  so,  and  consider 
the  history  of  those  meteors  during  that  time,  it  will  be 
manifest  that  their  perturbations  have  differed  consider- 
ably from  those  which  have  affected  their  leader,  so  to 
term  the  comet  in  whose  track  they  follow.  In  the  course 
of  those  years  the  comet  has  ma'de  seven  or  eight  revolu- 
tions, and  so. have  the  meteors,  while  Jupiter,  the  chief 
disturber  of  Biela's  comet,  has  made  four  or  five  revolu- 
tions. In  the  course  of  this  period  the  comet  must  have 
been  more  than  once  so  placed  as  to  be  very  considerably 
disturbed  by  Jupiter,  because  as  a  matter  of  fact  the  path 
of  the  comet  passes  not  very  far  (near  its  aphelion)  from 


The  Lost  Comet  and  its  Meteor-  Train.      95 

the  path  of  Jupiter.  The  same  general  statement  is 
true,  of  course,  of  the  meteors  twelve  weeks  behind. 
Now,  whenever  it  happened  that  the  comet  was  at  its 
nearest  to  Jupiter,  when  passing  that  critical  portion  of 
its  orbit,  the  meteors  twelve  weeks  behind  were  either 
not  brought  so  fully  under  the  influence  of  Jupiter's 
attraction,  or  if  they  were,  they  were  perturbed  by  him  in 
a  different  manner.  This  is  manifest  if  we  consider  how 
enormous  is  the  real  distance  corresponding  to  the  twelve 
weeks  or  so  by  which  the  meteors  are  behind  the  comet. 
And  again,  when  the  meteors  chanced  to  be  at  their 
nearest  to  Jupiter  when  passing  the  critical  part  of  their 
orbit,  the  comet,  twelve  weeks  in  front,  was  either  not 
brought  so  fully  under  Jupiter's  influence,  or  was  per- 
turbed in  a  different  way. 

Now  whenever  a  perturbation  has  been  produced,  it 
affects  the  orbit  of  the  perturbed  body.  Supposing  the 
comet  and  meteors  moving  in  precisely  the  same  orbit  at 
a  particular  moment,  when  Jupiter  is  pulling  the  comet 
in  a  certain  way  and  the  meteors  in  a  different  way,  then 
forthwith  the  comet  and  meteors  travel  in  different  orbits. 
The  difference  may  be  slight,  close  by  the  place  where 
such  perturbations  are  produced,  but  it  may  nevertheless 
appreciably  affect  the  positions  which  will  be  occupied 
by  the  comet  and  meteors  when  severally  traversing  some 
other  and  distant  part  of  their  orbit  (as  for  instance  when 
they  are  at  their  descending  node  close  by  the  earth's 
track).  And  again,  although  in  the  long  run  there  are 
compensatory  effects — the  comets  and  the  bodies  travelling 


96  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

twelve  weeks  behind  being  in  the  course  of  many  years 
subjected  to  every  variety  of  perturbative  effect  in  the 
same  respective  proportions — yet  such  cycles  of  compensa- 
tion are  enormously  long  in  the  case  of  bodies  moving  in 
an  orbit  like  that  of  Biela's  comet ;  and  practically  it  may 
be  said  that  compensation  is  never  effected.* 

So  that  unless  calculations  could  be  made  of  the  pertur- 
bations affecting  those  meteors  themselves  which  are 
travelling  twelve  weeks  behind  the  comet,  we  could  not 
possibly  be  certain  as  to  the  place  where  the  earth  would 
actually  encounter  the  meteor  flight,  or  whether  such  an 
encounter  would  take  place  at  all.  The  calculation  would 
be  one  of  immense  difficulty,  even  if  we  knew  where  and 
how  the  meteors  had  been  moving  at  some  particular  date  ; 

"  One  may  reason  thus  :  Given  a  body  travelling  in  the  orbit  of 
Biela's  comet ;  then  the  orbit  of  this  body  will  pass  through  endless 
changes.  Its  eccentricity  will  wax  and  wane  ;  its  inclination  will 
increase  and  diminish  ;  its  line  of  apsides  will  advance  and  retrograde, 
advancing  on  the  whole ;  its  line  of  nodes  will  advance  and  retrograde, 
retrograding  on  the  whole  ;  and  countless  ages  must  elapse  before  its 
orbit  resumes  its  original  figure,  for  the  four  kinds  of  change  will  not 
have  synchronous  periods.  Now  the  same  is  true  of  another  body, 
having  at  the  beginning  the  same  orbit  but  twelve  weeks  in  front  or 
behind.  This  body  will  have  its  orbit  passing  through  endless  changes, 
and  will  only  after  countless  ages  be  found  travelling  in  the  same 
orbit  as  at  first.  But  the  period  in  which  this  will  happen  is  not  the 
same  period  in  which  the  former  will  happen.  Each  period  is 
enormously  long ;  but  after  the  lapse  of  either  the  bodies  are  not 
travelling  in  the  same  orbit.  \Vhen  one  period  has  elapsed,  the  other 
is  far  from  being  completed  ;  when  the  latter  is  completed,  the  former 
is  far  past.  Nor  does  it  follow  that  the  perturbing  planets  are  in  the 
same  position  as  when  the  changes  began.  Many  thousands  of  such 
l>criods  must  pass  for  both  bodies  before  there  is  a  near  approach  to 
the  original  state  of  things  in  all  respects. 


The  Lost  Comet  and  its  Meteor-Train.      97 

but  as  we  know  nothing  on  either  point,  it  is  simply 
impossible  to  enter  upon  the  calculation. 

It  will  presently  be  seen  that  these  considerations  bear 
importantly  on  the  opinion  we  are  to  form  respecting  the 
events  which  have  recently  occurred. 

It  is  in  the  knowledge  of  all  my  readers  that  on  Novem- 
ber 27th  1872,  the  anticipated  display  of  meteors  did 
actually  occur.  It  was  a  display  very  remarkable  in 
character.  The  meteors  were  even  more  numerous,  in  fact 
they  were  far  more  numerous  than  during  the  memorable 
shower  of  the  night  between  November  13-14,  1866 ; 
though  the  meteors  were  not  so  large  on  the  average  as 
those  seen  on  the  latter  occasion.  I  select  from  among 
many  accounts  the  excellent  description  given  by  Professor 
Grant,  because  his  skill  and  practice  as  an  observer  give 
great  value  to  his  statements.  "In  their  general  features," 
he  says,  "  the  meteors  did  not  differ  from  those  of  the  great 
display  of  November  13-34,  1866.  They  were,  however, 
obviously  less  brilliant.  Their  normal  colour  was  white, 
with  a  pale  train  tinged  now  and  then  with  a  very  faint 
greenish  hue.  The  head  seldom  equalled  in  brightness  a 
star  of  the  first  magnitude.  From  time  to  time,  however,  a 
meteor  of  unusual  splendour  would  appear,  nearly  rivalling 
Jupiter  in  brightness.  In  such  cases  the  train,  especially 
when  breaking  up,  exhibited  a  reddish  tinge.  In  two 
instances  of  large  meteors  (those  of  8h.  13m.  and  9h.  33m.) 
the  colour  of  the  train  was  conspicuously  green.  In  general, 
however,  there  was  an  absence  of  the  brilliant  emerald  hue 


98  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

which  formed  so  conspicuous  a  feature  of  many  of  the 
larger  meteors  of  November  1866.  The  time  of  visibility 
of  a  meteor  did  not  exceed  two  or  three  seconds.  In  two 
or  three  instances  of  bright  meteors,  however,  the  debris 
of  the  train  continued  visible  for  about  thirty  seconds.  The 
arc  described  varied  as  usual  from  zero  to  forty  or  fifty 
degrees.  I  was  unable  to  detect  any  pronounced  differ- 
ence in  the  angular  velocity  of  the  meteors  as  compared 
with  the  meteors  of  November  1866.  During  the  whole 
time  of  the  occurrence  of  the  shower  I  directed  especial 
attention  to  the  region  of  the  heavens  from  which  the 
meteors  were  issuing,  with  the  view  of  detecting  station- 
ary or  nearly  stationary  meteors,  having  been  convinced, 
from  my  experience  of  the  meteoric  shower  of  November 
1 866,  of  the  facility  with  which  such  meteors  indicate 
the  position  of  the  radiant-point.  Several  meteors  of 
this  class  were  seen  during  the  progress  of  the  shower. 
At  8h.  43m.,  at  9h.  23m.,  and  at  9h.  35m.,  absolutely 
stationary  meteors  were  perceived.  They  rapidly  swelled 
out,  without  any  vestige  of  a  train,  and  then  suddenly 
collapsed.  They  all  concurred  in  placing  the  radiant- 
point  in  a  position  midway  between  7  Andromedce 
and  51  Andromeda,  perhaps  a  little  nearer  to  the 
former  star  than  to  the  latter.  Assuming  the  position 
of  the  radiant-point  to  be  midway  between  the  two 
stars  just  mentioned,  it  would  thus  be  situated  in  E.A. 
26°,  DecL  N.  44°.  This  conclusion  was  supported  by  the 
observations  of  nearly  stationary  meteors  in  the  vicinity 
of  the  radiant-point.  On  the  other  hand  the  courses  of  the 


The  Lost  Comet  and  its  Meteor-Train.      99 

more  distant  meteors  when  traced  back,  although  in  general 
assigning  the  same  position  to  the  radiant,  appeared  in 
many  instances  to  come  from  a  higher  region  situated  in 
Cassiopica.     Of  this  fact  (which  is  otherwise  indicated  by 
the  projection  of  the  observations)  I  do  not  entertain  the 
slightest  doubt,  my  attention  having  been  directed  to  it 
early  in  the  evening.     In  order  to  ascertain  the  time  of 
occurrence  of  the  maximum  of  the  shower,  it  was  necessary 
to  count  the  number  of  meteors  visible.   At  first  it  occurred 
to  me  to  place  two  observers,  one  looking  towards  the 
region  of  the  radiant-point,  and  the  other  towards  the 
opposite  region,  but  I  found  that  the  attempt  to  carry  into 
effect  this  arrangement  introduced  confusion.     I  therefore 
directed  the  observer  always  to  keep  the  star  7  Andromedce 
as  the  centre  of  vision,  and  to  continue  counting  as  many 
meteors  as  he  could  without  turning  round.     The  counting 
of  the  meteors  commenced  at  5h.  30m.,  and  was  prosecuted 
without   intermission  until   llh.   50m. ;  it   consequently 
embraced  an  interval  of  6h.  20m.  The  operation  was  effected 
by  counting  the  number  of  meteors  visible  in  each  suc- 
cessive interval  of  five  minutes.    The  meteors  counted  were 
thus  parcelled  out  into  seventy-six  groups,  each  group 
extending  over  five  minutes.     The  number  of  meteors 
counted  in  the  first  group  (oh.  30m.  to  5h.  35m.)  amounted 
to  40.     The  number  of  meteors  in  the  maximum  group 
(8h.  10m.  to  8h.  15m.  was  367.    The  number  of  meteors 
in  the  last  group  (llh.  45m.  to  llh.  50m.)  fell  to  6.    Tak- 
ing the  first  seventy-two  groups,  and  forming  them  into 


TOO  Oiir  Place  among  Infinities. 

twenty-four  groups  of  fifteen  minutes  each,  we  have  the 
following  results : — 


Quarter  of 
Hour 
ending 

No.  of 
Meteors 
Counted 

Quarter  of 
Hour 
ending 

No.  of 
Meteors 
Counted 

Quarter  of 
Hour 
ending 

No.  of 
Meteors 
Counted 

b.  in. 

h.  m. 

h.  m. 

5  45 

150 

7  45 

881 

9  45 

233 

6     0 

174 

8    0 

930 

10     0 

246 

6  15 

292 

8  15 

1070 

10  15 

190 

6  30 

507 

8  30 

777 

10  30 

116 

6  45 

643 

8  45  , 

599 

10  45 

111 

7    0 

840 

9     0 

413 

11     0 

74 

7  15 

721 

9  15 

418 

11  15 

48 

7  30 

890 

9  30 

213 

11  30 

22 

"It  is  clear  that  the  maximum  of  the  shower  occurred 
about  8h.  10m.  The  aggregate  number  of  meteors  counted 
from  5h.  30m.  to  llh.  50m.  (by  one  observer)  amounted 
to  10,579." 

To  this  it  may  be  added  that  in  Italy  the  shower  was 
even  richer,  for  Signor  Denza  states  that  in  6|  hours  no  less 
than  33,400  meteors  were  counted  by  four  observers.  "  The 
meteors  were  very  brilliant,"  he  adds,  "  and  were  noticed  in 
every  part  of  the  sky.  The  number  recorded  above  is  far 
less  than  the  truth,  for  we  found  it  frequently  impossible 
to  count  them.  The  maximum  display  took  place  between 
7h.  and  9h.,  and  for  21  minutes,  between  6h.  35m.  and 
6h.  56m.,  the  appearance  in  the  sky  was  that  of  a  meteoric 
cloud.  The  radiant-point  was  very  clearly  indicated  near 
y  Andromedce. 

Now  in  the  first  place  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  there  can 
be  no  question  whatever  as  to  the  meteoric  display  having 


The  Lost  Comet  and  its  Meteor-Train.     101 

been  produced  by  bodies  which  were  travelling  in  the 
track  (speaking  generally)  of  Biela's  comet.  It  is  suffi- 
cient to  compare  the  position  of  the  radiant-point  with 
that  which  would  have  been  due  to  meteors  following 
precisely  in  the  orbit  of  Biela's  comet,  as  calculated  for 
the  last  perturbed  epoch,  1866.  Mr  Hind,  the  superin- 
tendent of  the  "  Nautical  Almanac,"  has  calculated  for  the 
radiant-point  due  to  the  comet  a  place  in  R  A.  lh.  41m., 
and  N.  P.  D.  48°.  We  have  seen  that  Professor  Grant 
gives  for  the  observed  radiant-point  a  position  in  E.  A. 
26"  (or  lh.  44m.),  and  N.  P.  D.  44°,  a  singularly  close 
agreement  under  the  circumstances.* 

*  In  passing  I  would  venture  to  touch  on  what  I  cannot  but  regard 
as  an  error  in  the  treatment  of  this  subject  by  Professor  Newton  of 
America,  and  some  other  astronomers.  They  attribute  to  the  indica- 
tions of  the  meteoric  paths  a  degree  of  accuracy  which  cannot,  I  con- 
ceive, be  regarded  as  to  be  depended  upon.  And  where,  judging  from 
the  meteoric  motions,  the  radiant  seems  to  shift  in  position  or  to  occupy 
an  area  rather  than  to  be  a  mere  point,  they  deduce  such  and  such 
inferences  from  one  or  other  circumstance.  But  it  must  be  remembered 
that  apart  from  other  causes  which  would  tend  to  spread  the  radiant 
region,  the  meteors  must  bj  che  action  of  the  atmosphere  be  very  often, 
if  not  always,  caused  to  deviate  from  the  direction  in  which  they  had 
been  moving  before  they  reached  the  upper  limits  of  the  atmosphere. 
We  cannot  assume  that  because  the  air  is  very  rare  where  the  meteors 
first  become  visible,  they  therefore  encounter  an  inappreciable  resist- 
ance. The  very  fact  of  a  meteor  becoming  visible  shows,  on  the  con- 
traiy,  that  there  has  been  a  degree  of  compression  of  the  atmosphere 
in  front  of  the  meteor,  which  must  necessarily  involve  a  considerable 
resistance.  And  it  is  utterly  unlikely  that  this  resistance  should  take 
place  without  to  some  degree  affecting  the  direction  in  which  the 
meteor  travels.  Nor  will  all  meteors  be  alike  affected.  For  it  is  to  be 
remembered  that  of  the  Meteors  seen  from  any  given  station  some 
strike  the  atmosphere  in  a  very  different  way  than  others.  Some 
impinge  almost  squarely  upon  the  upper  atmospheric  layers,  while 
others  fall  much  more  aslant.  Then  there  must  often  be  a  difference  of 


IO2  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

But  now  comes  the  most  singular  part  of  the  whole 
affair.  It  occurred  to  the  German  astronomer  Klinkerfues 
that  if  search  could  be  made  in  the  part  of  the  heavens 
directly  opposite  to  that  whence  the  meteor-shower  had 
appeared  to  radiate,  the  cluster  of  meteoric  bodies  which 
had  produced  the  display  might  be  detected.  In  fact, 
Klinkerfues  appears  to  have  supposed  that  Biela's  comet 
had  itself  touched  the  earth  on  the  evening  of  November 
27,  for  he  telegraphed  to  Mr  Pogson  (the  Government 
astronomer  at  Madras)  in  the  following  terms  :  "  Biela 
touched  earth  on  27th;  search  near  Theta  Centauri"  And 
Pogson  understood  that  it  was  the  comet  itself  that  he  was 
searching  for,  since  he  wrote  as  follows,  in  describing  the 
results  of  his  search: — "I  was  on  the  look  out  from 
Comet-rise  (1 6h.)  to  Sun-rise  the  next  two  mornings,  but 
clouds  and  rain  disappointed  me.  On  the  third  attempt, 
however,  I  had  better  luck.  Just  about  17^h.  mean  time 
a  brief  blue  space  enabled  me  to  find  Biela,  and  though 
I  could  only  get  four  comparisons  with  an  anonymous 
star,  it  had  moved  forward  2.5  s.  in  four  minutes,  and  that 
settled  its  being  the  right  object.  I  recorded  it  as 
'  Circular ;  bright,  with  a  decided  nucleus,  but  no  tail,  and 
about  45"  in  diameter.'  This  was  in  strong  twilight. 
Next  morning,  December  3,  I  got  a  much  better  observa- 
tion of  it ;  seven  comparisons  with  another  anonymous 

density  and  of  arrangement  in  the  upper  strata  of  our  atmosphere. 
These  and  other  causes  which  may  be  pointed  out,  as  well  as  differences 
in  the  size,  weight,  and  density  of  the  individual  meteors,  must  lead  to 
appreciable  changes  in  the  direction  of  motion. 


The  Lost  Comet  and  its  Meteor-Train.     103 

star ;  two  with  one  of  our  current  Madras  Catalogue  Stars, 
and  two  with  7734  Taylor.  This  time  my  notes  were : 
'  Circular,  Diameter  75//,  bright  nucleus,  a  faint  but  distinct 
tail,  8'  in  length  and  spreading,  position  angle  from 
nucleus  about  280°.'  I  had  no  time  to  spare  to  look  for 
the  other  comet,  and  the  next  morning  the  clouds  and 
rain  had  returned.  The  positions,  the  first  rough,  the 
second  pretty  fair,  from  the  two  known  stars,  are : — 

Madras  M.  T.  R.A,  Apparent  N.  P.  D. 

h.         m.        s.  h.         m.        s.  °          '         * 

Dec.  2.      17    33    21      14      7    27        124    46 
„  3.      17    25    17      14    22    2-9        125      4    28 

It  is  manifest,  however,  that  whatever  the  object  seen 
by  Pogson  may  have  been,  it  was  not  Biela's  comet ;  for 
the  comet  was  due  in  that  part  of  its  orbit  no  less  than 
twelve  weeks  earlier,  and  any  retardation  which  could 
have  produced  so  great  a  delay  would  have  altogether 
changed  the  character  of  the  comet's  path. 

Still  it  might  be  supposed  that  certainly  what  Pogson  saw 
was  on  the  track  of  Biela's  comet,  was  in  fact  the  cluster 
of  bodies  which  produced  the  meteor-shower  of  November 
27.  Even  this,  however,  is  so  far  from  being  demonstrated 
that  skilful  mathematicians  consider  the  object  seen  by 
Pogson  to  have  had  no  connection  whatever  either  with 
Biela  itself  or  its  meteoric  train. 

This  at  any  rate  is  certain — a  flight  of  bodies  travelling 
on  the  track  of  Biela's  comet,  and  crossing  the  earth's 
orbit  on  November  27,  could  not  possibly  have  been  seen 
in  the  positions  in  which  Pogson  saw  a  cometic  or  cloud- 


1 04  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

like  object.  We  have,  Professor  A.  S.  Herschel  has 
pointed  out,  unmistakable  evidence  that  Pogson  saw  one 
and  the  same  object.  For  he  rated  the  motion  of  the 
object  on  the  first  morning,  and  the  observed  rate  accords 
perfectly  with  the  position  occupied  by  the  object  on  the 
second  morning. 

Two  observations  of  a  comet  do  not  afford  the  means  of 
determining  the  path  in  which  the  comet  is  travelling. 
But  if  we  combine  Pogson's  observations  with  some  other 
assumption,  as  that  the  object  he  saw  had  crossed  the 
earth's  orbit  on  November  27  at  a  given  hour,  or  that  the 
period  of  the  object  is  identical  with  that  of  Biela's  comet, 
or  the  like,  then  an  orbit  can  be  determined. 

Now  Capt.  Tupman,  in  a  paper  recently  read  before  the 
Royal  Astronomical  Society,  after  showing  that  the  meteors 
seen  on  the  night  of  Nov.  27  were  running  in  sensibly 
the  same  orbit  as  Biela's  comet,  proves  conclusively  that  a 
body  moving  in  the  same  orbit  as  those  meteors,  or  in  an 
orbit  parallel  to  them,  could  not  have  been  in  the  positions 
occupied  by  the  object  seen  by  Pogson.  We  must  assume 
greater  changes  in  the  character  of  the  orbit  than  appear 
admissible,  in  order  to  account  for  the  observed  positions  ; 
in  particular,  since  the  object  seen  by  Pogson  had  an 
apparent  motion  nearly  parallel  to  the  ecliptic,  the  inclina- 
tion of  its  orbit  cannot  possibly  be  so  great  as  12°  34', 
which  is  the  inclination  of  Biela's  comet. 

On  the  other  hand,  Dr.  J.  Holetschek,  in  No.  1920  of  the 
'  Astronomische  Nachrichten,'  combining  Pogson's  two 
observations,  with  Hubbard's  values  of  (1)  the  longitude 


The  Lost  Comet  and  its  Meteor-  Train.     105 

of  the  node,  (2)  the  longitude  of  the  perihelion,  and  (3)  the 
inclination,  deduces  for  the  perihelion  passage  of  Pogson's 
object  the  date  December  23'368  (mean  Berlin  time)  and 
the  perihelion  distance  '8339  ('8606  being  Hubbard's  value 
of  the  perihelion  distance  of  Biela's  orbit  in  1872).  It  is 
noteworthy  that  Tupman  obtains  for  the  meteor-flights 
of  last  November  and  for  Biela's  comet  the  following 
elements  respectively  :— 

Meteors  of  Nov.  27.  Biela's  Comet. 

Perihelion  passage  1872  Dec.  26'90      1872  Ocf  66'9  (?) 

Longitude  of  perihelion         111°     48'  109°     24' 

„      „      ascending  mode  245°    57'  245°    54' 

Inclination  .      .        .        .13°    24'  12°    34' 

Perihelion  distance    .        .        '8265  -8718 

Eccentricity      .        .        .        '7670  '7600 

Motion      ....        Direct  Direct 

So  that  Holetschek's  result  would  appear  to  indicate  that 
the  object  seen  by  Pogson  had  been  travelling  about  3£  days 
behind  the  meteors  observed  on  November  27  last. 

Professor  von  Oppolzer  of  Vienna,  the  eminent  orbit 
calculator,  shows  in  the  same  number  of  the  "  Astronomiche 
Nachrichten,"  that  the  same  problem  may  be  successfully 
treated*  in  a  totally  different  manner.  He  assumes  the 
period  (or  which  amounts  to  the  same  thing,)  the  major 
axis  of  the  object's  orbit  to  be  the  same  as  that  of  Biela's 
comet,  and  that  the  object  was  moving  from  the  earth  in 
the  interval  between  December  2  and  3,  deducing  elements 
nearly  resembling  those  of  Biela's  comet. 

It  appears  to  me  that  the  discordances  obtained  by 
different  astronomers  depend  largely  on  the  assumption 


1 06  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

that  the  object  seen  .by  Pogsou,  if  identifiable  at  all  with 
Biela's  meteor-train,  must  in  a  special  manner  be  identified 
with  the  cloud  of  meteors  through  which  the  earth  passed 
on  the  night  of  November  27.  But  is  there  any  valid 
reason  for  this  assumption  ?  It  may  seem  at  first  sight 
that  there  is  ;  that  a  cloud  of  meteors  sufficiently  dense  to 
produce  so  remarkable  a  display  should  be  visible,  when 
it  had  passed  beyond  the  earth,  as  a  cloud  of  light  in  the 
telescopic  field.  But  if  we  consider  the  real  distribution 
of  those  meteors  in  space,  we  shall  find  reason  to  conclude 
that  they  were  far  too  sparsely  distributed  to  be  visible 
under  any  circumstances,  by  the  light  they  were  capable 
of  reflecting.  Let  it  be  remembered  that  the  display  lasted 
about  six  hours,  and  that  during  that  period  about  50,000 
meteors  at  the  utmost  appeared  above  the  horizon  of  any 
given  place.  But  let  us  set  100,000  as  the  number  of 
meteors  so  appearing,  and  the  time  at  only  four  hours. 
Now  the  region  of  meteor-traversed  atmosphere  above 
the  horizon  plane  of  any  station  may  be  taken  as  a 
plano-convex  lens,  its  plane  circular  face  having  a 
diameter  certainly  not  less  than  1,000  miles  ;  and  as  the 
radiant  was  high  above  the  horizon,  we  shall  be  within  the 
truth  in  concluding  that  such  a  plane  on  the  average 
presented  (as  supposed  to  be  seen  from  the  advancing 
meteors)  an  area  equalling  the  100th  part  of  the  area  pre- 
sented by  the  whole  disc  of  the  earth.  So  that  if  we  take 
10,000,000  for  the  total  number  of  meteors  falling  on  the 
earth  during  four  hours,  we  shall  certainly  not  imder- 
estimate'  the  number  (referring  always  to  meteors  large 


The  Lost  Comet  and  its  Meteor -Train.     107 

enough  to  become  visible  to  the  naked  eye).  Now,  the 
actual  region  of  space  traversed  by  the  earth  in  four  hours 
is  a  cylinder  260,000  miles  long  and  having  a  cross  section 
nearly  8,000  miles  in  diameter.  Such  a  cylinder  would  have 
a  volume  of  12,500,000,000,000  cubic  miles,  and  to  each 
meteor  of  the  10,000,000  there  would  therefore  correspond 
an  average  space  of  1,250,000  cubic  miles  ;  that  is,  a  space 
corresponding  to  a  cube  nearly  108  miles  in  length  and 
breadth  and  height.  Since  such  meteors  as  were  seen  on 
the  night  of  November  27  have  been  estimated  at  less  than 
an  ounce  in  weight  (in  many  cases  only  a  few  grains),  it 
follows  that  their  dimensions  are  inconsiderable.  TLe 
largest  can  scarcely,  when  solid,  be  an  inch  in  diameter. 
It  will  be  conceived,  therefore,  how  small  must  be  the 
prospect  of  seeing  a  flight  of  bodies  so  exceedingly  minute 
compared  with  the  average  space  occupied  by  each.  It  is, 
indeed,  easy  to  estimate  the  luminosity  of  such  a  flight 
regarded  as  a  whole,  if  of  given  depth  and  at  a  given  dis- 
tance from  the  sun.  Thus,  suppose  the  flight  of  a  million 
miles  in  depth,  and  at  the  earth's  distance  from  the  sun. 
Along  a  range  of  a  million  miles  there  would  be  less  than 
10,000  meteors.  Now,  granting  each  to  have  a  disc  one 
square  inch  in  real  area,  we  should  have  a  total  area 
of  10,000  square  inches  (that  is,  8J  feet  square).  And  the 
ratio  of  this  area  to  108  miles  square  gives  the  ratio  of  the 
luminosity  of  the  meteor-cloud  (when  of  the  given  depth) 
to  the  luminosity  of  a  surface  illuminated  by  the  sun  at  the 
earth's  distance — (say,  the  moon  for  example).  Now  108 
miles  square,  or  11,664  square  miles  contain  11,664  x 


io8  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

(1,760)2  x  (36)2  square  inches,  or  roughly  (for  great  nicety 
would  be  useless  in  such  a  problem)  10,000  x  (2,000)2 
X  (35)2  square  inches  ;  so  that  the  ratio  we  require  is  1  to 
(TO.OOO)2  or  1  to  4,900,000,000.  That  is,  the  luminosity 
of  the  meteor-cloud  would  be  one-4,900,000,000th  only  of 
the  moon's,  and  necessarily  the  meteor-cloud  would  be 
quite  undiscernible.  Hence  we  may  be  assured  that  if  the 
object  seen  by  Pogson  was  connected  at  all  with  the 
meteor-cloud  through  which  the  earth  passed  on  November 
27,  he  saw  a  very  much  denser  part  of  the  meteor  cloud  ; 
and  there  is  no  reason  why  this  dense  portion  or  nucleus 
of  the  meteor-cloud  may  not  have  been  at  a  considerable 
distance  from  the  earth  on  the  27th  of  last  November. 
This  consideration  would  serve  to  remove  some  of  the 
more  perplexing  circumstances  of  the  recent  observations. 


JUPITER. 

THE  planet  Jupiter  has  passed  lately  (this  was  written  in 
1 873)  through  a  singular  process  of  change.  The  planet 
has  not,  indeed,  assumed  a  new  appearance,  but  has 
gradually  resumed  its  normal  aspect  after  four  or  five 
years,  during  which  the  mid-zone  of  Jupiter  has  been 
aglow  with  a  peculiar  ruddy  light.  The  zone  is  now 
of  a  creamy-white  colour,  its  ordinary  hue.  We  have, 
in  fact,  reached  the  close  of  a  period  of  disturbance, 
and  have  received  a  definite  answer  to  questions  which 
had  arisen  as  to  the  reality  of  the  change  described  by 
observers.  Many  astronomers  of  repute  were  disposed 
to  believe  that  the  peculiarities  recently  observed  were 
merely  due  to  the  instruments  with  which  the  planet 
has  been  observed — not,  indeed,  to  any  fault  in  those  in- 
struments, but,  in  fact,  to  their  good  qualities  in  showing 
colour.  A  considerable  number  of  the  earlier  accounts  of 
Jupiter's  change  of  aspect  came  from  observers  who  used 
the  comparatively  modern  form  of  telescope  known  as  the 
silvered-glass  reflectors,  and  it  is  well  known  that  these 
instruments  are  particularly  well  suited  for  the  study  of 
colour-changes.  Nevertheless,  observations  made  with 
the  ordinary  refracting  telescope  were  not  wanting ;  and 
it  had  begun  to  be  recognised  that  Jupiter  really  had 


1 10  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

altered  remarkably  in  appearance,  even  before  tbat  gradual 
process  of  change  which,  by  restoring  his  usual  aspect, 
enabled  every  telescopist  to  assure  himself  that  there  had 
been  no  illusion  in  the  earlier  observations. 

I  propose  now  to  discuss  certain  considerations  which 
appear  to  me  to  indicate  the  nature  and  probable  meaning 
of  the  phenomena  which  have  recently  been  observed  in 
Jupiter.  It  seems  to  me  that  these  phenomena  are  full 
of  interest,  whether  considered  in  themselves  or  in  con- 
nection with  those  circumstances  on  which  I  had  been 
led  to  base  the  theory  that  Jupiter  is  a  planet  altogether 
unlike  our  earth  in  condition,  and  certainly  unfit  to  be  the 
abode  of  living  creatures. 

I  would  first  direct  special  attention  to  the  facts  which 
have  been  ascertained  respecting  the  atmosphere  of  Jupiter. 

It  does  not  appear  to  have  been  noticed,  as  a  remarkable 
circumstance,  that  Jupiter  should  have  an  atmosphere 
recognisable  from  our  distant  station.  Yet,  in  reality, 
this  circumstance  is  not  only  most  remarkable,  but  is 
positively  inexplicable  on  any  theory  by  which  Jupiter  is 
regarded  as  a  world  resembling  our  own.  It  is  certain 
that,  except  by  the  effects  produced  when  clouds  form  and 
dissipate,  our  terrestrial  atmosphere  could  not  be  recog- 
nised at  Jupiter's  distance  with  any  telescopic  power  yet 
applied.  But  no  one  who  has  studied  Jupiter  with  ade- 
quate means  can  for  a  moment  fail  to  recognise  the  fact 
that  the  signs  of  an  atmosphere  indicate  much  more  than 
the  mere  formation  and  dissipation  of  clouds.  I  speak 
here  after  a -careful  study  of  the  planet  during  the  late 


Jupiter.  1 1 1 

opposition,  with  a  very  fine  reflecting  telescope  by  Brown- 
ing, very  generously  placed  at  my  disposal  by  Lord 
Lindsay ;  and  I  feel  satisfied  that  no  one  can  study 
Jupiter  for  many  hours  (on  a  single  night)  without  be- 
coming convinced  that  the  cloud-masses  seen  on  his  disc 
have  a  depth  comparable  with  their  length  and  bread. 
Now  the  depth  of  terrestrial  cloud-masses  would  at 
Jupiter's  distance  be  an  absolutely  evanescent  quantity. 
The  span  of  his  disc  represents  about  84,000  miles,  and 
his  satellites,  which  look  little  more  than  points  in 
ordinary  telescopes,  are  all  more  than  2,000  miles  in 
diameter.  I  am  satisfied  that  anyone  who  has  carefully 
studied  the  behaviour  of  Jupiter's  cloud-belts  will  find  it 
difficult  to  believe  that  their  depth  is  less  than  the 
twentieth  part  of  the  diameter  of  the  least  satellite. 
Conceive,  however,  what  the  depth  of  an  atmosphere 
would  be  in  which  cloud-masses  a  hundred  miles  deep 
were  floating ! 

It  may  be  asked,  however,  in  what  sense  such  an  at- 
mosphere would  be  inexplicable,  or,  at  least,  irreconcilable 
with  the  theory  that  Jupiter  is  a  world  like  our  eartlj. 
Such  an  atmosphere  would  be  in  strict  proportion,  it  might 
be  urged,  to  the  giant  bulk  of  the  planet,  and  such  relative 
agreement  seems  more  natural  than  would  be  a  perfect 
correspondence  between  the  depth  of  the  atmosphere  on 
Jupiter  and  the  depth  of  our  earth's  atmosphere. 

But  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  the  atmosphere  of 
Jupiter  is  attracted  by  the  mass  of  the  planet ;  and  some 
rather  remarkable  consequences  follow  when  we  pay 


H2  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

attention  to  this  consideration.  Of  course  a  great  deal 
must  be  assumed  in  an  inquiry  of  the  sort.  Since,  how- 
ever, we  are  discussing  the  question  whether  there  can  be 
any  resemblance  between  Jupiter  and  our  earth,  we  may 
safely  (so  far  as  our  inquiry  is  concerned)  proceed  on  the 
assumption  that  the  atmosphere  of  Jupiter  does  not  greatly 
differ  in  constitution  from  that  of  our  earth.  We  may  further 
assume  that  at  the  upper  part  of  the  cloud-layers  we  see, 
the  atmospheric  pressure  is  not  inferior  to  that  of  our 
atmosphere  at  a  height  of  seven  miles  above  the  sea-level, 
or  one-fourth  of  the  pressure  at  our  sea-level.  Combining 
these  assumptions  with  the  conclusion  just  mentioned, 
that  the  cloud-layers  are  at  least  100  miles  in  depth,  we 
are  led  to  the  following  singular  result  as  to  the  pressure 
of  the  Jovian  atmosphere  at  the  bottom  of  the  cloud-layer : 
— The  atmosphere  of  any  planet  doubles  in  pressure  with 
descent  through  equal  distances,  these  distances  depending 
on  the  power  of  gravity  at  the  planet's  surface.  In  the 
case  of  our  earth,  the  pressure  is  doubled  with  descent 
through  about  3£  miles ;  but  gravity  on  Jupiter  is  more 
than  2$  times  as  great  as  gravity  on  our  earth,  and  descent 
through  1*  mile  would  double  the  pressure  in  the  case  of 
a  Jovian  atmosphere.  Now  100  miles  contain  this  dis- 
tance (If  mile)  more  than  seventy-one  times ;  and  we 
must  therefore  double  the  pressure  at  the  upper  part  of  the 
cloud-layer  seventy-one  successive  times  to  obtain  the 
pressure  at  the  lower  part.  Two  doublings  raise  the 
pressure  to  that  at  our  sea-level ;  and  the  remaining  sixty- 
nine  doublings  would  result  in  a  pressure  exceeding  that 


Jupiter.  1 1 3 

at  our  sea-level  so  many  times  that  the  number  represent- 
ing the  proportion  contains  twenty-one  figures.*  I  say 
would  result  in  such  a  pressure,  because  in  reality  there 
are  limits  beyond  which  atmospheric  pressure  cannot  be 
increased  without  changing  the  compressed  air  into  the 
liquid  form.  What  those  limits  are  we  do  not  know, 
for  no  pressure  yet  applied  has  changed  common  air, 
or  either  of  its  chief  constituent  gases,  into  the  liquid 
form,  or  even  produced  any  trace  of  a  tendency  to 
assume  that  form.  But  it  is  easily  shown  that  there 
must  be  a  limit  to  the  increase  of  pressure  which  air 
will  sustain  without  liquefying.  For  the  density  of 
any  gas  changes  proportionately  to  the  increase  of  pressure, 
until  the  gas  is  approaching  the  state  when  it  is  about  to 
turn  liquid.  Now  air  at  the  sea-level  has  a  density  equal 
to  less  than  the  900th  part  of  the  density  of  water ;  so 
that  if  the  pressure  at  the  sea-level  were  increased  900 
times,  either  the  density  would  not  increase  proportionally, 
which  would  show  that  the  gas  was  approaching  the 
density  of  liquefaction,  or  else  the  gas  would  be  denser 
than  water,  which  must  be  regarded  as  utterly  impossible. 

*  The  problem  is  like  the  well-known  one  relating  to  the  price  of  a 
horse,  where  one  farthing  was  to  be  paid  for  the  first  nail  of  24  in  the 
•  shoes,  a  halfpenny  for  the  next,  a  penny  for  the  third,  two  pence  for 
the  fourth,  and  so  on.  It  may  be  interesting  to  some  of  my  readers  to 
learn,  that  if  we  want  to  know  roughly  the  proportion  in  which  the 
first  number  is  increased  by  any  given  number  of  doublings,  we  have 
only  to  multiply  the  number  of  doublings  by  ^ths,  and  add  1  to  the 
integral  part  of  the  result,  to  give  the  number  of  digits  in  the  number 
representing  the  required  proportions.  Thus  multiplying  24  by  ffcths 
gives  7  (neglecting  fractions)  ;  and  therefore  the  number  of  farthings  in 
the  horse  problem  is  represented  by  an  array  of  8  digits. 


1 1 4  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

Or  if  any  one  is  disposed,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  to 
assert  that  a  gas  (at  ordinary  temperatures)  may  be  as 
dense  as  water,  then  we  need  proceed  but  a  few  steps 
farther,  increasing  the  pressure  about  18,000  times  instead 
of  900  times,  to  have  the  density  of  platinum  instead  of 
that  of  water,  and  no  one  is  likely  to  maintain  that  our 
air  could  exist  in  the  gaseous  form  with  a  density  equal- 
ling that  of  the  densest  of  the  elements.  We  are  still  an 
enormous  way  behind  the  number  of  twenty-one  figures 
mentioned  above  ;  and  in  fact,  if  we  supposed  the  pressure 
and  density  to  increase  continually  to  the  extent  implied 
by  the  number  of  twenty-one  figures,  we  should  have  a 
density  exceeding  that  of  platinum  more  than  ten 
thousand  millions  of  millions  of  times  ! 

Of  course  this  supposition  is  utterly  monstrous,  and  I 
have  merely  indicated  it  to  show  how  difficulties  crowd 
around  us  in  any  attempt  to  show  that  a  resemblance 
exists  between  the  condition  of  Jupiter  and  that  of  our 
earth.  The  assumptions  I  made  were  sufficiently  moderate, 
be  it  noticed,  since  I  simply  regarded  (i.)  the  air  of 
Jupiter  as  composed  like  our  own;  (ii.)  the  pressure  at 
the  upper  part  of  his  cloud-layer  as  not  less  than  the 
pressure  far  above  the  highest  of  our  terrestrial  cumulus 
clouds  (with  which  alone  the  clouds  of  Jupiter  are  com- 
parable) ;  and  (iii.)  the  depth  of  his  cloud-layer  as  about 
100  miles.  The  first  two  assumptions  cannot  fairly  be 
departed  from  to  any  considerable  extent,  without  adopt- 
ing the  conclusion  that  the  atmosphere  of  Jupiter  is  quite 
unlike  that  of  our  earth,  which  is  precisely  what  I  desire 


Jupiter.  1 1 5 

to  maintain.  The  third  is,  of  course,  open  to  attack, 
though  I  apprehend  that  no  one  who  has  observed  Jupiter 
with  a  good  telescope  will  question  its  justice.  But  it  is 
not  at  all  essential  to  the  argument  that  the  assumed 
depth  of  the  Jovian  atmosphere  should  be  even  nearly  so 
great.  We  do  not  need  a  third  of  our  array  of  twenty- 
one  figures,  or  even  a  seventh  part,  since  no  one  who  has 
studied  the  experimental  researches  made  into  the  con- 
dition of  gases  and  vapours  can  for  a  moment  suppose 
that  an  atmosphere  like  ours  could  remain  gaseous, 
except  at  an  enormously  high  temperature,  at  a  pressure  of 
two  or  three  hundred  atmospheres.  Such  a  pressure 
would  be  obtained,  retaining  our  first  two  assumptions,  at 
a  depth  of  about  fourteen  miles  below  the  upper  part  of 
the  cloud-layer.  This  is  about  the  6,000th  part  of  the 
diameter  of  Jupiter ;  and  if  any  student  of  astronomy  can 
believe  that  that  wonderfully  complex  and  changeful  cloud 
envelope  which  surrounds  Jupiter,  has  a  thickness  of  less 
than  the  6,000th  part  of  the  planet's  diameter,  I  would 
recommend  as  a  corrective  the  careful  study  of  the  planet 
for  an  hour  or  two  with  a  powerful  telescope,  combined 
with  the  consideration  that  the  thickness  of  a  spider's  line 
across  the  telescopic  field  of  view  would  suffice  to  hide  a 
breadth  of  twenty  miles  on  Jupiter's  disc. 

But  we  are  not  by  any  means  limited  to  the  reasoning 
here  indicated,  convincing  as  that  reasoning  should  be  to 
all  who  have  studied  the  aspect  of  Jupiter  with  adequate 
telescopic  power.  We  have  in  Jupiter's  mean  density  an 
argument  of  irresistible  force  against  the  only  view  which 
6 


1 1 6  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

enables  us  even  hypothetically  to  escape  from  the 
conclusions  just  indicated.  Let  it  be  granted,  for  the 
sake  of  argument,  that  Jupiter's  cloud-layer  is  less  than 
fourteen  miles  in  depth,  so  that  we  are  freed  for  the 
moment  from  the  inference  that  at  the  lower  part  of  the 
atmosphere  there  is  either  an  intense  heat  or  else  a 
density  and  pressure  incompatible  with  the  gaseous 
condition.  We  cannot,  in  this  case,  strike  off  more  than 
twenty-eight  miles  from  the  planet's  apparent  diameter 
to  obtain  the  real  diameter  of  his  solid  globe — solid,  at 
least,  if  we  are  to  maintain  the  theory  of  his  resemblance  to 
our  earth.  This  leaves  his  real  diameter  appreciably  the 
same  as  his  apparent  diameter,  and  as  a  result  we  have 
the  mean  density  of  his  solid  globe  equal  to  a  fourth  of 
the  earth's  mean  density  precisely  as  when  we  leave  his 
atmosphere  out  of  the  question.  Now  I  apprehend  that 
the  time  has  long  since  passed  when  we  can  seriously  pro- 
ceed at  this  stage  to  say,  as  it  was  the  fashion  to  say  in 
text-books  of  astronomy,  "  therefore  the  substance  of  which 
Jupiter  is  composed  must  be  of  less  specific  gravity  than 
oak  and  other  heavy  woods."  "We  know  that  Brewster 
gravely  reasoned  that  the  solid  materials  of  Jupiter  might 
be  of  the  nature  of  pumice  stone,  so  that  with  oceans 
resembling  ours  a  certain  latitude  was  allowed  for  increase 
of  density  in  Jupiter's  interior.  But  in  the  presence  of 
the  teachings  of  spectroscopic  analysis,  few  would  now 
care  to  maintain,  as  probable,  so  preposterous  a  theory  as 
this.  Everything  that  has  hitherto  been  learned  respect- 
ing the  constitution  of  the  heavenly  bodies,  renders  it  quite 


Jupiter.  117 

unlikely  that  the  elementary  constitution  of  Jupiter 
differs  from  that  of  our  earth.  Again,  it  was  formerly 
customary  to  speak  of  the  possibility  that  Jupiter  and 
Saturn  might  be  hollow  globes,  mere  shells,  composed  of 
materials  as  heavy  as  terrestrial  elements.  But  whatever 
opinion  we  form  as  to  the  possibility  that  a  great 
intensity  of  heat  may  vaporise  a  portion  of  Jupiter's 
interior,  we  know  quite  certainly  that  there  must  be 
enormous  pressure  throughout  the  whole  of  the  planet's 
globe,  and  that  even  a  vaporous  nucleus  would  be  of 
great  density.  For  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  all 
that  I  have  said  above  respecting  the  possibility  of  gases 
existing  at  great  pressures  applies  only  to  ordinary 
temperatures — such  temperatures,  for  example,  as  living 
creatures  can  endure.  At  exceedingly  high  temperatures 
much  greater  pressure,  and  therefore  much  greater  density, 
can  be  attained  without  liquefaction  or  solidification.  And 
in  considering  the  effect  of  pressure  on  the  materials  of  a 
solid  globe,  we  must  not  fall  into  the  mistake  of  supposing 
that  the  strength  of  such  solid  materials  can  protect  its  sub- 
stance from  compression  and  its  effects.  We  must  extend 
our  conceptions  beyond  what  is  familiar  to  us.  We  know 
that  any  ordinary  mass  of  some  strong,  heavy  solid — as 
iron,  copper,  or  gold — is  not  affected  by  its  own  weight  so 
as  to  change  in  structure  to  an  appreciable  extent.  The 
substance  of  a  mass  of  iron  forty  or  fifty  feet  high,  would 
be  the  same  in  structure  at  the  bottom  as  at  the  top  of 
the  mass  ;  for  the  strength  of  the  metal  would  resist  any 
change  which  the  weight  of  the  mass  would  (otherwise) 


1 1 8  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

tend  to  produce.  But  if  there  were  a  cubical  mountain  of 
iron  twenty  miles  high,  the  lower  part  would  be  absolutely 
plastic  under  the  pressure  to  which  it  would  be  subjected. 
It  would  behave  in  all  respects  as  a  fluid,  insomuch  that 
if  (for  convenience  of  illustration)  we  suppose  it  enclosed 
within  walls  made  of  some  imaginary  (and  impossible) 
substance  which  would  yield  to  no  pressure,  then,  if  a 
portion  of  the  wall  were  removed  near  the  base  of  the  iron 
mountain,  the  iron  would  flow  out  like  water  *  from  a  hole 
near  the  bottom  of  a  cask.  The  iron  would  continue  to 
run  out  in  this  way,  until  the  mass  was  reduced  several 
miles  in  height.  In  Jupiter's  case  a  mountain  of  iron  of 
much  less  height  would  be  similarly  plastic  in  its  lower 
parts,  simply  because  of  the  much  greater  attractive  power 
of  Jupiter's  mass.  Thus  we  see  that  the  conception  of  a 
hollow  interior,  or  of  any  hollow  spaces  throughout  the 
planet's  globe,  is  altogether  inconsistent  with  what  is 
known  of  the  constitution  of  even  the  strongest  materials. 
How,  then,  are  we  to  explain  the  relatively  small  mean 
density  of  Jupiter's  globe  ?  On  the  supposition  that  his 
atmosphere  is  less  than  fourteen  miles  deep,  we  cannot  do 
so ;  for  there  is  nothing  hypothetical  in  the  above  consider- 
ations respecting  a  solid  globe  as  large  as  Jupiter's,  except- 
ing always  the  assumption  that  the  globe  is  not  formed  of 
substances  unlike  any  with  which  we  are  familiar.  Even 
this  assumption,  though  it  is  one  which  few  would  care  to 

*  The  effect  of  pressure  in  rendering  iron  and  other  metals  plastic  has 
been  experimentally  determined.  Cast  steel  has  been  made  to  flow 
almost  like  water,  under  pressure. 


Jupiter.  119 

maintain  in  the  present  position  of  our  knowledge,  amounts 
after  all  to  an  admission  of  the  chief  point  which  I  am 
endeavouring  to  maintain  :  it  is  one  way — but  a  very 
fanciful  way — of  inferring  that  Jupiter  is  utterly  unlike 
the  earth.  Eejecting  it,  as  we  safely  may,  we  find  the 
small  density  of  Jupiter  not  merely  unexplained,  but 
manifestly  inexplicable. 

All  our  reasoning  has  been  based  on  the  assumption 
that  the  atmosphere  of  Jupiter  exists  at  a  temperature  not 
greatly  differing  from  that  of  our  own  atmosphere.  If  we 
assume  instead  an  exceedingly  high  temperature,  abandon- 
ing of  course  the  supposition  that  Jupiter  is  an  inhabited 
world,  we  no  longer  find  any  circumstances  which  are  self- 
contradictory  or  incredible. 

To  begin  with,  we  may  on  such  an  assumption  find  at 
once  a  parallel  to  Jupiter's  case  in  that  of  the  Sun.  For 
the  Sun  is  an  orb  attracting  his  atmospheric  envelope  and 
the  material  of  his  own  solid  or  liquid  surface  (if  he  has 
any)  far  more  mightily  than  Jupiter  has  been  shown  to  do. 
All  the  difficulties  considered  in  the  case  of  Jupiter  would 
be  enormously  enhanced  in  the  case  of  the  Sun,  if  we  for- 
got the  fact  that  the  Sun's  globe  is  at  an  intense  heat  from 
surface  to  centre.  Now  we  know  that  the  Sun  is  intensely 
hot  because  we  feel  the  heat  that  he  emits,  and  recognise 
the  intense  lustre  of  his  photosphere  ;  so  that  we  are  not 
in  danger  of  overlooking  this  important  circumstance 
in  his  condition.  Jupiter  gives  out  no  heat  that  we  can 
feel,  and  assuredly  Jupiter  does  not  emit  an  intense  light 
of  his  own.  But,  when  we  find  that  difficulties  precisely 


1 20  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

corresponding  in  kind,  though  not  in  degree,  to  those  which 
we  should  encounter  if  we  discussed  the  Sun's  condition 
in  forgetfulness  of  his  intense  heat,  exist  also  in  the  case 
of  Jupiter,  it  appears  manifest  that  we  may  safely  adopt 
the  conclusion  that  Jupiter  is  intensely  heated,  though  not 
nearly  to  the  same  degree  as  the  Sun. 

We  have  thus  been  led  by  a  perfectly  distinct  and 
independent  line  of  reasoning  to  the  very  conclusion  which 
I  have  advocated  elsewhere  on  other  grounds,  viz.,  that 
Jupiter  is  in  fact  a  miniature  sun  as  respects  heat,  though 
emitting  but  a  relatively  small  proportion  of  light.  I 
would  invite  special  attention  to  the  circumstance  that  the 
evidence  on  which  this  conclusion  had  been  based  was 
already  cumulative.  And  now  a  fresh  line  of  evidence, 
in  itself  demonstrative,  I  conceive,  has  been  adduced. 
Moreover  I  have  not  availed  myself  of  the  argument,  very 
weighty  in  my  opinion,  on  which  Mr.  Mattieu  Williams 
has  based  similar  conclusions  respecting  the  temperature 
of  Jupiter,  in  his  interesting  and  valuable  work  called 
"  The  Fuel  of  the  Sun."  I  fully  agree  with  him  in  regard- 
ing it  as  a  reasonable  assumption,  though  I  cannot  go  so 
far  as  to  regard  it  as  certain,  that  every  planet  has  an 
atmosphere  whose  mass  corresponds  with,  or  is  even 
perhaps  actually  proportional  to,  the  mass  of  the  planet  it 
surrounds.  If  we  make  such  an  assumption  in  the  case 
of  Jupiter,  we  arrive  at  conclusions  closely  resembling 
those  to  which  I  have  been  led  by  the  above  process  of 
reasoning. 

Thus    many  lines    of    evidence,   and    some   of  them 


Jupiter.  121 

absolutely  demonstrative  in  my  opinion,  point  to  the 
conclusion  that  Jupiter  is  an  orb  instinct  with  fiery  energy, 
aglow  it  may  well  be  with  an  intense  light  which  is  only 
prevented  from  manifesting  itself  by  the  cloudy  envelope 
enshrouding  the  planet. 

But  so  soon  as  we  regard  the  actual  phenomena 
presented  by  Jupiter  in  the  light  of  this  hypothesis,  we 
find  the  means  of  readily  interpreting  what  otherwise 
would  appear  most  perplexing.  Chief  among  the 
phenomena  thus  accounted  for,  I  would  place  the  recent 
colour-changes  in  the  equatorial  zone  of  Jupiter. 

"What,  at  first  view,  could  appear  more  surprising  than 
a  change  affecting  the  colour  of  a  zone-shaped  region 
whose  surface  is  many  times  greater  than  the  whole  sur- 
face of  our  earth  ?  It  is  true  that  a  brief  change  might  be 
readily  explained  as  due  to  such  changes  as  occur  in  our 
own  air.  Large  regions  of  the  earth  are  at  one  time  cloud- 
covered  and  at  another  free  from  clouds.  Such  regions, 
seen  from  Venus  or  Mercury,  would  at  one  time  appear 
white,  and  at  the  other  would  show  whatever  colour  the 
actual  surface  of  the  ground  might  possess  when  viewed 
as  a  whole.  But  it  seems  altogether  impossible  to  explain 
in  this  way  a  change  or  series  of  changes  occupying  many 
years,  as  in  the  case  of  the  recent  colour-changes  of 
Jupiter's  belt.  Let  me  not  be  misunderstood.  I  am  not 
urging  that  the  changes  in  Jupiter  are  not  due  to  the 
formation  and  dissipation  of  clouds  in  his  atmosphere. 
On  the  contrary,  I  believe  that  they  are.  "What  seems  to 
me  incredible,  is  the  supposition  that  we  have  here  to  deal 


1 22  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

with  such  changes  as  occur  in  our  own  air  in  consequence 
of  solar  action. 

I  do  not  lose  sight  of  the  fact  that  the  Jovian  year  is  of 
long  duration,  and  that  whatever  changes  take  place  in 
the  atmosphere  of  Jupiter  through  solar  action  might  be 
expected  to  be  exceedingly  slow.  Nay,  it  is  one  of  the 
strongest  arguments  against  the  theory  that  solar  action  is 
chiefly  in  question,  that  any  solar  changes  would  be  so 
slight  as  to  be  in  effect  scarcely  perceptible.  It  is  not 
commonly  insisted  upon  in  our  text-books  of  astronomy — 
in  fact,  I  have  never  seen  the  point  properly  noticed  any- 
where— that  the  seasonal  changes  in  Jupiter  correspond 
to  no  greater  relative  change  than  occurs  in  our  daily 
supply  of  solar  heat  from  about  eight  days  before  to  about 
eight  days  after  the  spring  or  autumn  equinox.  It  is 
incredible  that  so  slight  an  effect  as  this  should  produce 
those  amazing  changes  in  the  condition  of  the  Jovian 
atmosphere  which  have  unquestionably  been  indicated  by 
the  varying  aspect  of  the  equatorial  zone.  It  is  manifest 
that,  on  the  one  hand,  the  seasonal  changes  should  be  slow 
and  slight  so  far  as  they  depend  on  the  sun,  and  that,  on 
the  other,  the  sun  does  not  rule  so  absolutely  over  the 
Jovian  atmosphere  as  to  cause  any  particular  atmospheric 
condition  to  prevail  unchanged  for  years. 

If,  however,  Jupiter's  whole  mass  is  in  a  state  of  intense 
heat— if,  as  appears  to  be  the  case,  the  heat  is  in  fact 
sufficient  to  maintain  an  effective  resistance  against  the 
tremendous  force  of  Jovian  gravitation — we  can  understand 
any  changes,  however  amazing.  We  can  see  how  enormous 


Jupiter.  123 

quantities  of  vapour  must  continually  be  generated  in  the 
lower  regions  to  be  condensed  in  the  upper  regions,  either 
directly  above  the  zone  in  which  they  were  generated  or 
north  or  south  of  it,  according  to  the  prevailing  motions  in 
the  Jovian  atmosphere.  And  although  we  may  not  be 
able  to  indicate  the  precise  reason  why  at  one  time  the 
mid  zone  or  any  other  belt  of  Jupiter's  surface  should 
exhibit  that  whiteness  which  indicates  the  presence  of 
clouds,  and  at  another  should  show  a  colouring  which 
appears  to  indicate  that  the  glowing  mass  below  is  partly 
disclosed,  we  remember  that  the  difficulty  corresponds  in 
character  to  that  which  is  presented  by  the  phenomena  of 
solar  spots.  We  cannot  tell  why  sun-spots  should  wax 
and  wane  in  frequency  during  a  period  of  about  eleven 
years ;  but  this  does  not  prevent  us  from  adopting  such 
opinions  respecting  the  condition  of  the  sun's  glowing 
photosphere  as  are  suggested  by  the  behaviour  of  the 
spots. 

It  may  be  asked  whether  I  regard  the  ruddy  glow  of 
Jupiter's  equatorial  zone,  during  the  period  of  disturbance 
lately  passed  through,  as  due  to  the  inherent  light  of  glow- 
ing matter  underneath  his  deep  and  cloud-laden  atmo- 
sphere. This  appears  to  me  on  the  whole  the  most  pro- 
bable hypothesis,  though,  it  is  by  no  means  certain  that 
the  ruddy  colour  may  not  be  due  to  the  actual  constitution 
of  the  planet's  vaporous  atmosphere.  In  either  case,  be  it 
noted,  we  should  perceive  in  this  ruddy  light  the  inherent 
lustre  of  Jupiter's  glowing  mass ;  only  in  one  case  we  assume 
that  that  lustre  is  itself  ruddy,  in  the  other  we  suppose 


1 24  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

that  light,  originally  white,  shiues  through  ruddy  vapour- 
masses.  It  is  to  be  remembered,  however,  that  whichever 
view  we  adopt,  we  must  assume  that  a  considerable  por- 
tion of  the  light  received,  even  from  these  portions  of 
the  planet's  disc,  must  be  reflected  sunlight.  In  fact, 
from  what  we  know  about  the  actual  quantity  of  light 
received  from  Jupiter,  we  may  be  quite  certain  that  no 
very  large  portion  of  that  light  is  inherent.  Jupiter  shines 
about  as  brightly  as  if  he  were  a  giant  cumulus-cloud,  and 
therefore  almost  as  white  as  driven  snow.  Thus  he  sends 
us  much  more  light  than  a  globe  of  equal  size  of  sandstone, 
or  granite,  or  any  known  kind  of  earth.  We  get  from 
him  about  three  times  as  much  light  as  a  globe  like  our 
moon  in  substance,  but  as  large  as  Jupiter,  and  placed 
where  Jupiter  is,  would  reflect  towards  the  earth  ;  but  not 
quite  so  much  as  we  should  receive  from  a  globe  of  pure 
snow  of  the  same  size  and  similarly  placed.  It  is  only 
because  large  parts  of  the  surface  of  Jupiter  are  manifestly 
not  white,  that  we  seem  compelled  to  assume  that  some 
portion  of  his  light  is  inherent. 

But  the  theory  that  Jupiter  is  intensely  hot  by  no 
means  requires,  as  some  mistakenly  imagine,  that  he  should 
give  out  a  large  proportion  of  light.  His  real  solid  or 
liquid  globe  (if  he  have  any)  might,  for  instance,  be  at  a 
white  heat,  and  yet  so  completely  cloud-enwrapped  that 
none  of  its  light  could  reach  us.  Or  again,  his  real  sur- 
face might  be  like  red-hot  iron,  giving  out  much  heat  but 
very  little  light. 

I  shall  close  the  present  statement  of  evidence  in  favour 


Jupiter.  125 

of  what  I  begin  to  regard  as  in  effect  a  demonstrated  theory, 
with  the  account  of  certain  appearances  which  have  been 
presented  by  Jupiter's  fourth  satellite  during  recent 
transits  across  the  face  of  the  planet.  The  appearances 
referred  to  have  been  observed  by  several  telescopists,  but 
I  will  select  an  account  given  in  the  monthly  notices  of  the 
"  Astronomical  Society,"  by  Mr  Eoberts,  F.R.A.S.,  who 
observed  the  planet  with  a  fine  telescope  by  Wray,  8 
inches  in  aperture.  "On  March  26,  1873,"  he  says,  "I 
observed  Jupiter  about  8  p.m.,  and  found  the  satellite  on 
the  disc.  I  thought  at  first  it  must  be  a  shadow ;  but,  on 
referring  to  the  '  Nautical  Almanac/  found  that  it  was  the 
fourth  satellite  itself.  A  friend  was  observing  with  me, 
and  we  both  agreed  that  it  was  a  very  intense  black,  and 
also  was  not  quite  round.  We  each  made  independent 
drawings  which  agreed  perfectly,  and  consider  that  the 
observation  was  a  perfectly  reliable  one.  We  could  not 
imagine  that  such  an  intensely  black  object  would  be 
visible  when  off  the  disc,  and  waited  with  some  impatience 
to  see  the  immersion,  but  were  disappointed  by  fog,  which 
came  on  just  at  the  critical  time."  Another  observer, 
using  a  telescope  only  two  inches  in  aperture,  saw  the 
satellite  when  off  the  disc,  so  that  manifestly  the  blackness 
was  merely  an  effect  of  contrast. 

In  considering  this  remarkable  phenomenon,  we  must 
not  forget  that  the  other  satellites  do  not  look  black  (though 
some  of  them  look  dark)  when  crossing  Jupiter's  disc,  so 
that  we  have  to  deal  with  a  circumstance  peculiar  to  the 
fourth  or  outermost  satellite.  Nevertheless,  we  seem  pre- 


1 26  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

eluded  from  supposing  that  any  other  difference  exists 
between  this  satellite  and  the  others  than  a  certain  in- 
feriority of  light-reflecting  power.  I  might  indeed  find  an 
argument  for  the  view  which  I  have  suggested  as  not 
improbable,  that  Jupiter  is  a  heat-sun  to  his  satellites,  since 
the  three  innermost  would  be  in  that  case  much  better 
warmed  than  the  outermost,  and  therefore  would  be  much 
more  likely  to  be  cloud-encompassed,  and  so  would  reflect 
more  light.  But  I  place  no  great  reliance  on  reasoning  so 
ingenious,  which  stands  much  as  a  pyramid  would  stand 
(theoretically)  on  its  apex.  The  broad  fact  that  a  body 
like  the  fourth  satellite,  probably  comparable  to  our  moon 
in  light-reflecting  power,  looks  perfectly  black  when  on  the 
middle  of  Jupiter's  disc,  is  that  on  which  I  place  reliance. 
This  manifestly  indicates  a  remarkable  difference  between 
the  brightness  of  Jupiter  and  the  satellite ;  and  it  is  clear 
that  the  excess  of  Jupiter's  brightness  is  in  accordance 
with  the  theory  that  he  shines  in  part  with  native  light, 
or,  in  other  words,  is  intensely  heated. 

This  completes  the  statement  of  the  evidence  obtained 
during  the  recent  opposition  of  Jupiter  in  favour  of  a  theory 
which  already  had  the  great  advantage  of  according  with 
all  known  facts,  and  accounting  for  some  which  had 
hitherto  seemed  inexplicable.  If  this  theory  removes 
Jupiter  from  the  position  assigned  to  him  by  Brewster  as 
the  noblest  of  inhabited  worlds,  it  indicates  for  him  a 
higher  position  as  a  subordinate  sun,  nourishing  with  his 
heat,  as  he  sways  by  his  attractive  energy,  the  scheme  of 
worlds  circling  round  him.  The  theory  removes  also  the 


Jupiter.  127 

difficulty  suggested  by  the  apparent  uselessness  of  the 
Jovian  satellites  in  the  scheme  of  creation.  When,  instead 
of  considering  their  small  power  of  supplying  Jupiter 
with  light,  we  consider  the  power  which,  owing  to  his 
great  size  and  proximity,  he  must  possess  of  illuminating 
them  with  reflected  light,  and  warming  them  with  his 
native  heat,  we  find  a  harmony  and  beauty  in  the  Jovian 
system  which  before  had  been  wanting ;  nor,  when  we 
consider  the  office  which  the  Sun  subserves  towards  the 
members  of  his  family,  need  we  reject  this  view  on  account 
of  the  supposition — 

That  bodies  bright  and  greater  should  not  serve 
The  less  not  bright. 

Even  the  most  ardent  advocate  of  the  theory  of  life  in 
other  worlds  should  at  least  not  complain  when  he  finds 
for  one  imagined  world  four  others  substituted. 


SATUKN    AND    ITS    SYSTEM. 

• 

THE  planet  Saturn  is  perhaps  the  most  interesting  of  all 
the   orbs  in  the  heavens.     Independently   even   of  his 
ring-system,  which  gives  him  so  singularly  beautiful  an 
aspect  in  the  telescope,  he  holds  a  remarkable  position  as 
the  centre  round  which   circle  as  many  dependent  orbs 
as  those  which  constitute  the  primary  members  of  the 
Sun's  family.    There  is  something  startling  in  the  thought 
that  in  those  remote  depths,  ten  times  farther  away  from 
the  great  centre  of  the  system  than  we   ourselves   are 
placed,   a  system  at  once  so  beautiful  and  so   elaborate 
should  be  pursuing  its  wide  orbit.     A  universe  is  there, 
reduced  by  vastness  of  distance  to  a  mere  speck  of  dull 
light — a  '  miracle  of  design '  which  has  existed  for  ages, 
during  which  none  on  this  earth  recognized  that  aught 
distinguished  the  planet  from  its  fellows,  save  character- 
istics of  inferiority. 

I  propose  to  give  a  brief  sketch  of  some  of  the  most 
interesting  facts  which  have  been  ascertained  respecting 
this  wonderful  planet.  I  may  remark,  in  passing,  that 
although  I  have  on  several  occasions  discussed  matters 
connected  with  the  subject  of  the  planet's  condition,  this 
is  the  first  occasion  on  which  I  have  described  Saturn  and 


Saturn  and  its  System.  129 

its   system  in   a  general  way   since   the  time   when   I 
wrote  the  work  bearing  that  name. 

It  is  not  wonderful,  when  we  consider  the  dull  aspect 
and  slow  motions  of  Saturn,  that  the  ancients  should 
have  associated  with  this  planet  ideas  of  gloom  and  of 
malign  influences.  The  alchemist  assigned  the  metal  lead, 
heavy  and  poisonous,  to  the  most  distant  and  most  slowly 
moving  planet  known  to  them.  The  astrologer  regarded 
Saturn  as  the  most  fatal  of  all  the  planets.  Chaucer  thus 
presents,  in  the  address  of  Saturn  to  Venus,  the  character- 
istics of  Saturn's  influence  :  * 

'  My  dere  dough ter  Venus,  quod  Saturne, 
My  cours  that  hath  so  wide  for  to  turne, 
Hath  more  power  than  wot  any  man. 
Min  is  the  drenching  in  the  see  so  wan, 
Min  is  the  prison  in  the  derke  cote, 
Min  is  the  strangel  and  hanging  by  the  throte, 
The  murmure  and  the  cherles  rebelling, 
The  groyning,  and  the  prive  empoysoning. 
I  do  vengeaunce  and  pleine  correction, 
While  I  dwell  in  the  sign  of  the  leon. 
Min  is  the  ruine  of  the  high  halles, 
The  falling  of  the  totires  and  of  the  walles 
Upon  the  minour  or  the  carpenter : 
I  slew  Sampson  in  shaking  tb^  piler. 
Min  ben  also  the  maladies  colde, 
The  derk  tresons,  and  the  castes  olde : 
My  loking  is  the  fader  of  pestilence.' 

Travelling  at  a  distance  from  the  Sun  varying  from 
823  millions  to  921  millions  of  miles,  or  from  nine  to  ten 

*  The  word  Saturnine  sufficiently  indicates  the  character  ascribed 
to  the  planet's  influence  on  the  fates  of  men  and  nations. 


1 30  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

times  the  Earth's,  Saturn  accomplishes  a  complete  revolu- 
tion around  the  Sun  in  rather  less  than  thirty  years.  As 
the  Earth  goes  once  round  the  Sun  while  Saturn  is 
traversing  but  about  the  thirtieth  part  of  his  orbit,  it 
follows  that  year  after  year  he  is  seen  to  advance  but  by  a 
small  distance  along  his  track  on  the  heavens.  The  Earth 
comes  between  Saturn  and  the  Sun,  and  then  Saturn  is 
visible  at  night,  and  therefore  favourably  ;  then  the  Earth 
makes  a  complete  circuit,  and  has  to  advance  but  a  little 
way  further  before  she  is  again  between  Saturn  and  the 
Sun.  In  fact,  year  after  year,  the  return  of  Saturn  to  the 
midnight  sky  occurs  about  twelve  days  later,  so  that  if  in 
one  year  he  is  well  seen  in  the  summer,  he  will  be  well 
seen  the  summer  after,  and  so  on  for  several  successive 
summers,  before  the  year  comes  when  he  is  well  seen  in 
autumn.  Then  for  several  more  years  (about  seven)  he  is 
well  seen  in  the  autumn  months.  Next,  for  about  seven 
years,  he  is  well  seen  in  the  winter  months.  And  lastly, 
for  about  seven  successive  years,  he  is  well  seen  in  the 
spring  months.  In  1873,  he  was  actually  at  his  nearest 
to  the  Earth,  and  highest  above  the  horizon,  at  midnight 
on  July  21st.  In  1874,iie  held  such  a  position  on  August 
3rd.  This  year  on  August  16th;  and  so  on.  Tor  ordinary 
observation,  however,  Saturn  is  as  well  placed  as  he  can 
be  about  two  months  after  opposition  ;  for  it  is  only  the 
astronomer  who  is  willing  to  wait  until  midnight  for  his 
observations  of  any  celestial  body. 

Two  hundred  and  sixty-two  years  have  passed  since 
Galileo  first  examined  Saturn  with  the  telescope  by  which 


Saturn  and  its  System.  1 3 1 

he  had  already  discovered  the  moons  of  Jupiter.  It  must 
have  been  with  singular  interest  that  he  prepared  for  his 
first  telescopic  view  of  the  planet.  Yet  he  could  scarcely 
have  expected  what  actually  awaited  him.  There,  in  the 
small  field  of  view  of  his  telescope,  was  what  appeared 
like  a  triple  planet.  Not  a  planet  accompanied  by  two 
moons  such  as  those  which  attend  on  Jupiter :  these 
moons,  seen  in  Galileo's  telescopes,  were  the  merest  points 
of  light,  and  scarcely  to  be  distinguished  from  stars. 
What  Galileo  now  saw  was,  however,  very  different. 
There  seemed  to  be  a  central  orb,  and  half  overlapping  it 
two  others,  somewhat  smaller  indeed,  but  still  presenting 
considerable  discs.*  "When  I  observe  Saturn,"  says 
Galileo,  writing  to  the  Grand  Duke  of  Tuscany,  "  he  seems 
to  be  triformed  ;  with  a  glass  magnifying  more  than  thirty 
times,  the  central  body  seems  the  largest ;  the  two  others 
situated  one  on  the  east  and  one  on  the  west,  seem  to 
touch  the  central  body.  They  are  like  two  supporters, 
who  help  old  Saturn  on  his  way,  and  always  remain  at 
his  side.  With  a  glass  of  lower  magnifying  power,  the 
planet  appears  elongated  and  of  the  form  of  an  olive." 

In  December  1610,  and  again  during  the  winter  of 
1611-12,  these  two  attendant  orbs  seemed  to  grow  smaller 
and  smaller,  though  retaining  their  position  unchanged. 

In  the  winter  of  1612-1613,  Galileo  again  examined 
Saturn,  hoping  to  learn  something  more  about  these  remark- 

*  What  Galileo  thought  he  saw  may  be  represented  by  setting  two 
shillings  with  a  space  an  inch  or  so  wide  between  them,  and  midway 
over  that  space  a  half-crown. 


132  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

able  supporters.  But  to  his  intense  astonishment  they  wer3 
not  to  be  seen.  The  planet  shone  with  as  fairly  round  a 
disc  as  Mars  or  Jupiter.  Galileo  was  so  startled  at  this 
strange  event,  that  he  began  almost  to  doubt  the  evidence 
of  his  senses.  "  What  is  to  be  said  concerning  so  strange 
a  metamorphosis  ?"  he  wrote.  "  Are  the  two  lesser  orbs 
consumed,  after  the  manner  of  the  solar  spots  ?  Have 
they  vanished  and  suddenly  fled?  Has  Saturn  perhaps 
devoured  his  own  children?  Or  were  the  appearances 
indeed  an  illusion  or  fraud,  with  which  the  glasses  have 
so  long  deceived  me,  as  well  as  many  others  to  whom  I 
have  shewn  them?  Now,  perhaps,  is  the  time  come  to 
revive  the  well-nigh  withered  hopes  of  those  who,  guided 
by  more  profound  contemplations,  have  discovered  the 
fallacy  of  the  new  observations,  and  demonstrated  the 
utter  impossibility  of  their  existence.  I  do  not  know  what 
to  say  in  a  case  so  surprising,  so  unlocked  for,  and  so 
novel.  The  shortness  of  the  time,  the  unexpected  nature 
of  the  event,  the  weakness  of  my  understanding,  and  the 
fear  of  being  mistaken,  have  greatly  confounded  me." 

Galileo  afterwards  saw  the  smaller  orbs  return  into  view  ; 
but  he  noticed  that  as  they  grew  larger  and  larger  they 
changed  strangely  in  shape,  until  he  finally  saw  them  lose 
their  globular  appearance  altogether,  each  assuming  the 
figure  of  two  arms  stretched  round  the  planet. 

I  shall  not  describe  here,  at  length,  the  gradual  process 
by  which  the  true  nature  of  the  ring  became  recognized. 
Let  it  suffice  to  mention  that  Huyghens  first,  in  1656, 
announced  that  Saturn  is  not  attended  by  two  companion 


Saturn  and  its  System.  1 33 

orbs,  but  by  a  mighty  ring, — flat,  so  that  when  turned 
edgewise  towards  the  Earth  it  cannot  be  seen  in  ordinary 
telescopes,  and  tilted  towards  the  level  of  the  path  in 
which  the  planet  travels,  so  that  at  two  opposite  parts  of 
the  path  the  ring,  as  seen  from  the  Earth,  appears  to  attain 
its  greatest  opening. 

In  passing,  it  may  be  mentioned  that  in  1656  the  ring 
was  closed — that  is,  turned  edgewise  towards  the  Earth — 
and  that  it  opened  out  after  1656  so  as  to  show  the  same 
flat  side  of  the  ring  (the  northern  side)  which  is  visible  at 
present.  This  side  remained  in  view,  the  ring,  first  open- 
ing out  and  then  closing  up,  until  December,  1671,  when 
the  ring  was  again  turned  edgewise  towards  the  Earth,  after 
which  the  southern  face  came  into  view.  Now  it  is  well 
to  notice  that  though  so  many  years  have  elapsed  since 
Huyghens  discovered  the  nature  of  the  rings,  there  have 
not  been  many  of  these  changes  by  which  the  northern 
and  southern  faces  of  the  ring  are  brought  alternately  into 
view.  To  my  idea,  it  gives  a  singularly  impressive  concep- 
tion of  the  stately  motion  of  Saturn  in  his  orbit,  to  notice 
that  during  all  the  years  which  have  passed  since  astrono- 
mers knew  that  Saturn  is  girdled  about  by  a  ring,  the 
ring  has  swayed  so  slowly  to  and  fro,  (as  seen  from  the 
Earth,)  that  the  northern  side  has  been  turned  only  eight 
times  towards  the  Sun,  and  the  southern  only  seven. 
Two  hundred  and  sixteen  times  the  Earth  has  circled 
round  the  Sun,  while  Saturn  has  not  yet  swayed  his  ring 
through  all  its  phases  so  many  as  eight  times. 

In  1675  Cassini  found  that  the  ring  is  divided  by  a 


1 34  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

strong  dark  band  into  two  concentric  rings.  But  the 
English  astronomer,  William  Ball,  had  discovered  this 
feature  ten  years  earlier.  The  interest  of  Cassini's  obser- 
vation consisted  in  the  fact  that  it  proved  the  band  to  be  a 
division  between  two  distinct  rings,  and  not  a  mere  dark 
streak  upon  one  face  of  a  flat  ring. 

Huyghens  had,  in  the  meantime,  discovered  a  satellite 
attending  on  Saturn.  This  orb,  which  has  received  the 
name  Titan,  is  distinguished  among  all  the  secondary 
members  of  the  planetary  system  by  its  superior  size.  It 
is  larger  than  the  primary  planet  Mercury,  and  little 
inferior  to  the  planet  Mars.  Cassini  discovered  in  1671 
another  satellite  (now  called  Japetus)  also  large,  though 
not  nearly  so  large  as  Titan.  "We  have  no  other  means  of 
estimating  the  magnitude  of  these  bodies  than  by  con- 
sidering their  brightness.  But  assuming  them  to  resemble 
our  own  Moon,  and  the  moons  of  Jupiter,  in  their  power 
of  reflecting  sunlight,  it  would  follow  that  Titan  is  about 
4000  miles  in  diameter,  and  Japetus  about  3000. 

But  perhaps  the  most  remarkable  circumstance  respect- 
ing these  bodies,  is  the  enormous  distance  at  which  they 
travel  around  their  primary.  The  outermost  of  Jupiter's 
moons  travels  at  a  distance  of  1,190,000  miles  from 
Jupiter.  The  distance  of  Japetus  from  Saturn  is  nearly 
twice  as  great,  being  no  less  than  2,210,000  miles.  Titan 
travels  at  a  distance  of  760,000  miles  from  Saturn. 

It  is  impossible  to  consider  these  enormous  distances  in 
the  case  of  Jupiter's  outer  moon,  and  the  two  chief  moons 
of  Saturn,  without  being  led  to  consider  in  what  degree 


Saturn  and  its  System.  135 

these  orbs  seem  likely  to  subserve  the  purpose  of  supply- 
ing light  to  their  primaries.  It  may  be  very  unphilo- 
sophical  to  reason  from  final  causes ;  not  because  of  the 
objection  urged  by  some,  that  we  have  yet  to  demonstrate 
that  there  is  design  in  the  scheme  of  the  universe,  but 
for  a  reason  which  others  may  accept  willingly, — to 
wit,  because  however  certain  we  may  be  that  there  is 
design  in  every  portion  of  the  universe,  we  are  very  far 
from  being  able  to  satisfy  ourselves  of  the  real  purpose  of 
any  particular  created  object.  Nevertheless,  the  mind  of 
man  is  so  constituted  that  it  will  inquire  into  final  causes 
even  where  the  inquiry  may  be  hopeless,  and  will  be  ready 
to  recognize  final  causes  where,  perhaps,  the  evidence  is 
much  less  satisfactory  than  it  appears.  Now,  certainly, 
it  is  natural  for  the  astronomer  to  consider  the  moons  of 
Jupiter  and  Saturn  either  as  intended  to  subserve  the 
same  purpose  as  our  own  moon,  or  (if  it  can  be  shewn  that 
they  cannot  subserve  such  a  purpose)  as  created  for  some 
one  or  other  of  the  special  purposes  which  we  seem  to 
recognize  among  the  celestial  bodies  of  different  orders. 
Taking  Titan  and  Japetus  as  they  are  shewn  to  us  by  our 
telescopes — two  orbs  together  equal  in  bulk  to  two  such 
planets  as  Mercury — it  is  very  difficult  indeed  to  imagine 
that  they  subserve  no  useful  purpose  at  all. 

Now,  if  we  consider  the  amount  of  light  which  Titan  and 
Japetus  can  supply  to  their  primary  when  they  are  '  full,' 
we  shall,  I  think,  be  led  to  doubt  whether  they  can  have 
been  intended  to  serve  the  same  purpose  as  our  Moon,  and 
still  less  shall  we  be  able  to  believe  that  they  were  meant, 


1 36  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

as  Brewster  and  Chalmers  have  supposed,  to  compensate 
the  Saturnians  for  their  distance  from  the  sun.  Titan, 
when  full,  must  appear  to  Saturn  as  an  orb  having  some- 
what less  than  two-thirds  of  our  Moon's  apparent  diameter. 
Such  an  orb,  if  as  bright  (intrinsically)  as  our  moon,  would 
no  doubt  be  a  useful  light-giver.  But  it  must  be  remem- 
bered that  the  moons  of  Saturn,  being  as  far  from  the  Sun 
as  Saturn  is,  are  like  him  very  faintly  illuminated.  They 
are  illuminated  by  only  about  one-ninetieth  part  of  the 
light  which  our  Moon  receives  !  accordingly,  whereas  the 
disc  of  Titan  must  be  about  four-ninths  of  our  Moon's,  the 
luminosity  of  this  small  disc  is  only  one-ninetieth  of  our 
Moon's,  so  that  the  total  quantity  of  light  supplied  by 
Titan  to  Saturn  is  only  4-810ths,  or  about  a  200th  part  of 
that  which  we  receive  from  the  full  moon. 

This  would  seem  to  shew,  at  least  to  those  who  recog- 
nize design  in  the  works  of  the  Almighty,  that  Titan  was 
certainly  not  intended  to  serve  the  same  purpose  to 
Saturnians  that  our  Moon  serves  to  the  inhabitants  of 
earth. 

But  if  this  seems  strongly  shewn  in  the  case  of  Titan, 
it  is  much  more  strongly  shewn  in  the  case  of  Japetus. 
For  Japetus  is  smaller  than  Titan,  and  almost  exactly 
three  times  as  far  away.  As  a  moon,  it  has  a  diameter 
equal  to  little  more  than  one-seventh  of  our  Moon's.  The 
disc  it  shews  is  but  about  the  forty-third  of  our  Moon's, 
and  its  lustre  being  one-ninetieth  (like  Titan's),  the  total 
quantity  of  light  which  it  supplies  to  its  primary  is  only 
equal  to  about  the  3850th  part  of  that  which  we  receive 


Saturn  and  its  System.  137 

from  the  full  moon.  It  may  readily  be  shewn,  indeed, 
that  our  Earth  supplies  more  than  eight  times  as  much 
light  to  the  planet  Venus  (when  our  Earth  is  seen  at  her 
brightest  from  Venus)  as  Japetus  supplies  to  its  primary. 

In  passing  we  may  notice  that  another  satellite  called 
Hyperion — between  Titan  and  Japetus — is  so  much 
smaller  than  Japetus  (though  probably  about  a  thousand 
miles  in  diameter)  as  to  supply  less  than  half  as  much 
light  to  Saturn,  probably  about  1-9 000th  part  of  the  light 
which  we  receive  from  the  Moon. 

Thus  we  seem  led  to  the  conclusion  that  these  moons, 
at  any  rate,  are  not  intended  to  compensate  the  Saturnians 
for  their  great  distance  from  the  Sun.  That  three  orbs 
should  have  been  created,  to  supply  together  about  the 
200th  part  of  the  light  which  our  Moon  supplies,  and  that 
this  provision  should  have  been  intended  to  compensate 
the  Saturuians  for  the  circumstance  that  they  get  from  the 
Sun  only  about  one-ninetieth  part  of  the  light  which  we 
receive,  are  propositions  too  improbable,  as  it  seems  to  me, 
to  be  reasonably  entertained.  When  it  is  added,  that  all 
the  eight  Saturnian  moons  together  would  supply — if  all 
full  together — only  about  the  sixteenth  part  of  the  light 
which  we  receive  from  the  full  moon,  it  seems  abundantly 
demonstrated,  I  conceive,  that  whatever  purpose  the 
Saturnian  satellite-system  was  intended  to  subserve,  it 
was  not  intended  to  compensate  the  Saturnians  for  the 
effects  of  their  great  distance  from  the  great  centre  and 
luminary  of  the  planetary  system. 

On  December  23,  1672,  Cassini  discovered  a  satellite 


1 38  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

travelling  within  the  orbit  of  Titan  ;  and  in  March,  1684, 
he  discovered  two  other  satellites  travelling  yet  nearer  to  • 
Saturn.  It  affords  striking  evidence  of  the  patience  with 
which  these  astronomers  of  the  seventeenth  century  worked, 
that  in  order  to  discover  these  two  satellites  Cassini  had 
to  employ  telescopes  one  hundred  and  one  hundred  and 
thirty-six  feet  long  (without  tubes,  however).  In  other 
words,  the  distance  of  the  object-glass  from  the  observer's 
eye  was  more  than  twice  as  great  as  the  length  of  the 
gigantic  tube  of  the  Eosse  telescope.  Observing  under 
such  conditions  must  have  been  the  most  tedious  work 
conceivable.  It  would  be  exceedingly  difficult  to  get  an 
object  into  the  field  of  view,  and  even  more  difficult  to 
keep  it  there.  The  modern  observer,  who,  with  well 
appointed  equatorial,  has  but  to  set  his  telescope  by  the 
divided  circles,  and  can  then  by  setting  the  clock  going, 
be  saved  all  further  trouble — the  telescope  simply  travelling 
after  the  object  by  means  of  the  clock-motion — may  look 
with  some  degree  of  contempt  on  the  rough  appliances  of 
his  predecessors  :  yet  he  has  so  much  the  better  reason 
for  looking  with  cordial  admiration  on  the  patient  and 
zealous  spirit  with  which  the  astronomers  of  former  times 
conducted  their  labours. 

More  than  a  century  passed  before  any  further  discovery 
of  importance  was  effected.  On  August  19th,  1787,  Sir  W. 
Herschel  thought  he  could  recognise  a  sixth  satellite  trav- 
elling very  close  to  Saturn's  rings.  But  it  was  not  until  he 
had  completed  his  forty-feet  reflector  that  he  could  assure 
himself  on  this  point.  On  August  27th,  1789,  the  first 


Saturn  and  its  System.  139 

evening  after  this  powerful  instrument  had  been  completed, 
Herschel  turned  it  towards  Saturn.  As  soon  as  the 
planet  was  brought  into  the  field  he  plainly  perceived  six 
stars  shining  around  Saturn.  Five  of  these  were  the 
satellites  already  discovered  ;  and  in  less  than  two  and  a 
half  hours  Herschel  had  satisfied  himself  that  the  sixth 
was  also  a  satellite.*  Soon  after  Herschel  discovered  a 
seventh  satellite,  travelling  yet  closer  to  the  outer  ring. 

It  remains  only  to  be  mentioned,  in  order  to  complete 
the  record  of  satellite  discovery,  that  an  eighth  satellite, 
travelling  between  the  paths  of  Titan  and  Japetus,  was 
discovered  independently  by  Bond  in  America,  and  Lassell 
in  England.  It  is  probably  the  smallest  of  the  whole 
family ;  and  there  is  something  so  remarkable  in  the  cir- 
cumstance that  this  tiny  orb  should  thus  be  found  travelling 
between  the  two  giant  satellites,  Titan  and  Japetus,  that 
we  may  almost  be  permitted  to  entertain  the  suspicion* 
that  in  reality  Hyperion  is  but  one  of  a  ring  of  small 
satellites  travelling  between  the  orbits  of  Titan  and 
Japetus. 

Before  returning  to  the  consideration  of  the  Saturnian 

*  It  has  been  asserted  that  the  sixth  satellite  was  discovered  with  one 
of  the  twenty-feet  reflectors,  and  Sir  John  Herschel  has  been  quite 
seriously  taken  to  task  for  maintaining  that  the  discovery  was  due  to 
the  forty-feet  telescope.  The  above  are  the  actual  circumstances,  as 
recorded  by  Sir  W.  Herschel  himself.  It  seems  wholly  impossible  to 
regard  the  doubtful  view  which  he  obtained  in  1787  as  the  actual  dis- 
covery of  the  satellite.  According  to  all  the  rules  usually  adopted  in 
these  cases,  the  true  discovery  dates  from  those  two  and  a  half  hours 
of  observation,  during  which  Herschel  first  satisfied  himself  that  the 
faint  speck  of  light  near  Saturn  was  not  a  fixed  star. 

7 


1 40  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

rings,  it  may  be  well  for  us  to  consider  the  nature  of  Saturn's 
family  of  satellites.  We  have  in  this  scheme  what  may 
be  regarded  as  no  inaccurate  picture,  in  miniature,  of  the 
Solar  System  itself.  Of  course,  there  are  differences  in 
points  of  detail,  since  Nature  does  not  repeat  herself  detail 
for  detail  in  such  cases.  Yet  we  find  some  striking 
features  of  resemblance.  Thus  the  Sun's  family  consists  of 
eight  members,  and  so  also  does  Saturn's.  Among  the 
planets  there  are  two  which  are  prominent  among  the  rest 
by  their  great  bulk  ;  and  in  Saturn's  family  we  find  also 
Titan  which  we  can  compare  with  Jupiter,  and  Japetus 
which  we  can  compare  with  Saturn. 

Certainly,  if  we  consider  what  the  Saturnian  satellite 
family  really  is,  that  the  orbs  composing  it  are  all  large  in 
reality,  however  minute  they  may  appear  either  when 
viewed  with  the  telescope  or  when  considered  with  refer- 
ence to  such  orbs  as  Jupiter  or  Saturn  ;  that  the  span  of 
the  complete  system  is  no  less  than  4,400,000  miles,  or 
more  than  five  times  the  Sun's  diameter ;  that  even 
Japstus,  which  moves  the  slowest,  circles  on  his  orbits 
with  a  rapidity  which  exceeds  a  hundred-fold  the  velocity 
of  our  swiftest  express  trains — we  cannot  but  regard  this 
system  of  secondary  orbs  as  a  most  important  portion  of 
the  scheme  ruled  over  by  the  Sun.  If  we  are  compelled 
to  believe  that  the  purpose  intended  to  be  fulfilled  by  these 
bodies  is  not  the  illumination  of  the  Saturnian  nights — 
and  for  my  own  part  I  can  arrive  at  no  other  conclusion — 
we  seem  bound  to  believe  that  they  were  created  for  some 
other  purpose  of  importance.  It  does  not  seem  at  all 


Saturn  and  its  System.  141 

unlikely,  on  tins  view  of  the  subject,  that  they  are 
themselves  the  abodes  of  living  creatures  of  various 
orders.  I  have  before  shewn  reasons  for  believing 
that  Saturn  may  be  a  source  whence  heat  is  supplied  to 
these  eight  orbs,  whereas  it  seems  unlikely  that  he  is 
himself  a  world  fit  to  be  the  abode  of  living  creatures. 
Again,  though  the  satellites  supply  Saturn  with  very  little 
light,  yet  they  are  capable  of  supplying  each  other  with 
no  inconsiderable  amount,  and  must  frequently  present 
phenomena  of  great  beauty  and  interest  as  viewed  from 
each  other.  Thus  a  variety  of  reasons  suggest  the  pro- 
bability that  we  are  to  look  among  the  Saturnian  satellites, 
and  not  to  Saturn  himself,  for  places  fit  to  be  the  abodes 
of  living  creatures. 

We  have  seen  that  in  the  latter  half  of  the  seventeenth 
century  Saturn's  ring  had  been  found  to  be  divided. 
Sir  W.  Herschel,  notwithstanding  the  great  telescopic 
power  which  he  applied  to  the  examination  of  the  rings, 
was  unable  to  do  more  than  satisfy  himself  of  the  existence 
of  the  great  division.  It  was  suspected  in  his  day  that 
other  divisions  exist, — not  that  any  had  been  seen,  but 
that  the  discussion  of  the  nature  of  the  ring-system  had  led 
to  the  inference  that  it  must  consist  of  many  distinct  rings. 
But  Herschel  could  not  detect  signs  of  the  existence  of  any 
other  divisions  than  the  great  one. 

But  during  the  present  century  many  skilful  observers 
have  recognized  other  divisions.  One  such  division 
separates  the  outer  ring  into  two  of  nearly  equal  width. 
This  division  seems  to  be  permanent;  but  it  is  most  difficult 


142  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

of  detection,  and  can  only  be  seen  with  telescopes  of  the 
first  quality  and  on  nights  when  the  atmospheric  conditions 
are  very  favourable.  Other  traces  of  division  have  not 
continued  to  be  recognizable,  and  are  therefore  probably 
not  permanent.  It  has  been  remarked  that  "if  each 
division  thus  detected  were  considered  as  a  satisfactory 
indication  of  a  permanent  division  through  a  complete 
circumference,  it  would  follow  that  the  system  consists  not 
of  two  or  three,  but  rather  of  thirty  or  forty  concentric 
rings.  Strange  as  such  a  conclusion  might  appear,  and 
manifold  as  are  the  conditions  of  instability  the  complexity 
of  such  a  system  would  introduce,  we  should  have  no  re- 
source (on  the  assumption  of  the  solidity  of  the  rings)  but 
either  to  accept  this  solution  of  the  question,  or  to  reject 
the  testimony  of  most  accurate  and  skilful  observers — of 
such  men  as  Encke,  the  Struves,  Captain  Kater  and  Jacob, 
Mr.  Dawes,  and  the  astronomers  of  the  Collegio  Romano. 
The  telescopes  also  through  which  such  divisions  have 
been  repeatedly  seen,  have  been  among  the  most  celebrated 
instruments  of  modern  times." 

But  the  most  singular  discovery  yet  made  respecting 
this  remarkable  ring-system  remains  to  be  described.  On 
November  loth,  1850,  Bond,  of  America,  discovered  a  dark 
ring  inside  the  inner  bright  one ;  and  a  few  days  later 
Dawes,  in  England,  independently  discovered  this  ring. 
The  colour  of  the  dark  ring  is  a  deep  purple  ;  or  rather, 
since,  as  we  shall  presently  see,  the  ring  is  semi-transparent, 
and  therefore  a  portion  of  its  apparent  colour  is  that  which 
it  transmits,  we  may  say,  without  committing  ourselves  to 


Saturn  and  its  System.  143 

any  theory  as  to  the  true  seat  of  the  colour,  that  the  region 
occupied  by  the  ring  presents  a  deep  purple  colour.  The 
nearer  part  of  the  dark  ring  can  be  traced  over  the  disc  of 
the  planet,  but  the  outline  of  the  planet  can  be  recognized 
through  the  ring.  This  portion  of  the  ring  does  not  shew 
a  purple  tinge,  but  has  been  compared  to  a  crape  veil.  A 
division  has  at  times  appeared  in  the  dark  ring,  which 
also  appears  at  times  to  be  separated  from  the  neighbour- 
ing bright  ring. 

Professor  Bond,  of  America,  noticed  at  about  the  same 
time  a  very  remarkable  darkening  of  the  inner  bright  ring, 
on  its  inner  edge,  close  to  the  dark  ring.  The  peculiarity 
about  this  darkening  was,  that  instead  of  being  exactly 
similar  in  shape  to  the  outlines  of  the  several  rings,  its 
outline  formed  a  longer  oval,  as  though  the  darkened  part 
were  wider  in  those  places  which  lie  upon  the  seeming 
longer  axis  of  the  rings.  If  the  rings  were  really  oval,  as 
they  appear  through  the  effects  of  foreshortening,  this 
peculiarity  would  be  explicable ;  but  as  the  rings  are 
circular,  and  every  part  in  turn  comes  into  the  position 
indicated,  for  the  rings  rotate  and  moreover  Saturn  himself 
carries  them  into  varying  positions  as  seen  from  the  Earth, 
the  appearance  is  altogether  inexplicable  as  a  mere  shade 
or  darkening.  If,  between  the  bright  ring  and  the  dark 
ring,  there  were  a  ring  of  an  intermediate  tint,  that  ring, 
being  concentric  with  the  others  (else  it  could  not  rotate), 
would  present  similar  outlines,  whether  the  whole  system 
were  more  or  less  foreshortened.  This  not  being  the  case, 
one  outline  of  the  darkened  part  being  always  more 


144  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

elliptical  than  the  other,  we  must,  in  explaining  the 
darkening,  find  an  interpretation  which  will  explain 
this  peculiarity.  I  believe  the  explanation  enforced 
upon  us  by  this  consideration,  is  simply  that  the  inner 
part  of  the  bright  ring  is  transparent,  or  rather,  that 
we  can  see  through  this  part,  for,  as  will  presently 
appear,  we  have  no  reason  for  believing  that  the  actual 
substance  of  any  part  of  the  ring-system  is  transparent 
in  the  same  sense  that  glass  or  crystal  is  transparent.  I 
have  shewn  in  my  treatise  on  Saturn  that  if  the  inner 
part  of  the  bright  ring  consists  of  a  multitude  of  concentric 
zones  between  which  the  dark  sky  beyond  can  be  seen 
from  our  terrestial  station,  the  observed  appearances  would 
necessarily  be  seen.  The  explanation,  to  be  adequately 
understood,  requires  such  an  illustration  as  is  given  in  the 
ninth  plate  of  that  work ;  but  its  general  principle  may  be 
understood  by  any  one  accustomed  to  drawing,  who  will 
attend  to  the  following  description.  Suppose  several  white 
hoops  to  be  lying  one  within  the  other  (and  quite  con- 
centrically) on  a  dark  flat  surface ;  the  hoops  being  not 
shaped  like  those  used  by  girls,  but  like  the  iron  hoops 
which  boys  use.  (A  piece  of  cane  bent  into  a  circle  would 
make  such  a  hoop.)  Now,  if  we  looked  at  such  a  set  of 
hoops  from  above,  we  should  see  so  many  white  concentric 
circles  on  a  dark  ground.  But  let  the  point  of  view  be 
not  directly  above,  so  that  we  look  slantwise  at  the  set  pf 
hoops.  Then  we  shall  see  a  number  of  similar  white  ovals 
on  a  dark  ground.  Now,  if  these  ovals  were  mere  oval 
lines,  that  is  if  the  hoops  were  mere  threads,  the  dark 


Saturn  and  its  System.  145 

spaces  between  them  would  seem  to  grow  narrow  where 
the  ovals  were  narrowed,  and  in  just  the  same  degree  ;  hut 
as  the  ovals  are  formed  hy  stout  hoops  the  case  is  altered, 
the  dark  spaces  are  more  narrowed  where  the  ovals  are 
flattened.  Nay,  if  the  hoops  are  pretty  close  to  each  other, 
a  very  little  foreshortening  will  make  them  seem  actually 
to  touch  where  the  ovals  are  flattened,  while  where  the 
ovals  are  lengthened  out  the  dark  background  is  visible. 
(If  the  reader  will  draw  such  a  set  of  hoops,  as  they 
would  actually  be  seen,  he  will  at  once  perceive  that  this 
is  so.)  Now,  without  supposing  that  the  rings  of  Saturn 
are  composed  of  such  hoops,  I  find  myself  led  to  the  con- 
clusion that  the  matter  forming  the  rings  runs  into  hoop- 
like  shapes,  and  that  where  Bond  saw  the  darkening,  above 
described,  these  hoop-formed  portions  were  far  enough  apart 
to  let  the  dark  sky  beyond  be  seen  where  the  ovals  of  the 
rings  were  most  lengthened,  the  spaces  closing  up  by  fore- 
shortening where  these  ovals  were  most  narrowed.  It  is 
demonstrable,  indeed,  that,  if  the  appearance  observed  by 
Professor  Bond  was  not  a  mere  illusion  (which  in  the  case 
of  so  practised  an  observer  is  altogether  unlikely),  it  can 
be  explained  in  this  way  and  no  other.  So  that  the 
peculiar  darkening  seen  by  Bond  is  an  independent  proof 
of  the  multiple  nature  of  the  ring-system — a  proof  as 
complete  as  though  Bond's  telescope  had  been  powerful 
enough  to  reveal  the  several  rings  forming  this  part  of  the 
bright  inner  ring. 

Saturn's  ring-system,  regarded  as  a  whole,  is  a  structure 
so  remarkable  that  we  seem  invited  to  consider  it  with  a 


1 46  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

special  degree  of  attention,  in  order  that  if  possible  we 
may  form  some  idea  of  its  real  nature.  If  there  were  no 
other  circumstance  remarkable  about  it  but  its  mere  vast- 
ness,  it  would  even  then  be  well  deserving  of  our  closest 
scrutiny.  But  that  a  ring  system  so  symmetrical  and 
beautiful  should  girdle  a  planet  completely  about,  that  it 
should  accompany  the  planet  on  its  path  around  the  Sun, 
that  it  should  be  as  definite  a  portion  of  the  planet's 
system  as  the  belts  on  the  planet's  real  globe,  or  as  the 
satellites  which  circle  about  that  orb,  these  are  circum 
stances  which  render  the  study  of  the  ring-system  specially 
interesting.  For  we  cannot  but  recognize  the  fact  that 
such  a  system,  swayed  as  it  must  be  by  the  mighty  attrac- 
tion of  Saturn's  mass,  must  present  a  number  of  relations 
of  a  very  complex  and  perplexing  kind. 

Let  us  in  the  first  place  briefly  consider  the  dimensions 
of  the  rings  and  of  the  globe  round  which  they  circle. 

Saturn's  globe  is  somewhat  compressed,  its  greatest 
diameter  being  73,000  miles,  its  least  diameter  66,000 
miles.  Remembering  that  the  Earth's  mean  diameter  is 
about  7900  miles,  we  see  how  vastly  the  planet  exceeds 
the  Earth  in  volume.  Roughly  the  volume  of  Saturn  is 
seven  hundred  times  that  of  the  Earth,  his  mass  about 
ninety  times  the  Earth's,  for  the  materials  of  which  he  is 
constructed  are  on  the  average  of  much  smaller  specific 
gravity  than  those  forming  the  Earth's  globe. " 

The  utmost  span  of  the  rings — that  is,  the  diameter  of 
the  outer  boundary  of  the  outer  ring — is  about  167,000 
miles,  the  breadth  of  this  ring  about  10,000  miles.  The 


Saturn  and  its  System.  147 

great  division  between  the  rings  has  a  width  of  about 
1600  miles.  The  inner  bright  ring  has  a  breadth  of 
about  17,500  miles,  and  the  dark  ring  is  about  8500  miles 
wide.  If  we  add  together  those  breadths,  we  find  for  the 
width  of  the  entire  system  37,600  miles,  or  rather  more 
than  half  the  equatorial  diameter  of  the  planet.  The 
inner  diameter  of  the  system  of  rings — that  is,  the 
diameter  of  the  inner  boundary  of  the  inner  ring,  is  there- 
fore about  91,800  miles ;  and  a  space  of  about  9400  miles 
intervenes  between  the  dark  ring  and  the  body  of  the 
planet.  The  thickness  of  the  ring-system  has  not  been 
satisfactorily  determined.  It  is  probably  less,  perhaps 
very  much  less,  than  one  hundred  miles. 

Now  it  would  obviously  be  impossible  to  consider  here 
at  length  the  reasoning  which  has  been  applied  to  ascertain 
the  nature  of  the  rings.  This  subject  alone  forms  in  my 
treatise  on  Saturn  a  chapter  nearly  twice  as  long  as  the 
whole  of  the  present  essay ;  yet  only  those  parts  of  the 
subject  are  there  treated  which  are  suitable  for  the  general 
reader.  Here  then  I  must  give  the  merest  sketch  of  the 
matter. 

Before  the  subject  was  treated  by  the  mathematician, 
many  singular  theories  were  suggested  concerning  the 
rings.  Maupertuis  thought  that  the  tail  of  a  comet  passing 
near  Saturn  had  been  attracted  from  its  course  by  the 
planet's  mass,  and  has  since  continued  to  circle  as  a  ring 
around  Saturn.  Buffon  considered  that  the  equator  of 
Saturn  must  once  have  extended  to  the  outer  edge  of  the 
ring,  and  that  the  equatorial  portion  was  thrown  off  by 


148  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

the  centrifugal  force  (that  imaginary  force  which  has  been 
the  parent  of  so  many  unphilosophical  fancies)  while  the 
rest  of  the  planet  has  contracted  to  its  present  dimensions. 
Mairan  entertained  a  view  somewhat  resembling  Buffon's  ; 
he  supposed  that  the  rings  are  the  remains  of  outer  shells 
formerly  existing  around  Saturn,  which  have  been  broken 
up  by  some  vast  convulsion. 

But  when  mathematicians  had  obtained  some  degree  of 
mastery  over  the  problems  suggested  by  the  action  of 
gravity — in  particular  when  they  had  begun  to  recognize 
how  the  peculiarities  of  the  Moon's  motion  are  accounted 
for  by  the  law  of  gravitation — they  began  to  inquire  into 
a  number  of  other  problems  of  the  same  sort.  Amongst 
these,  the  questions  suggested  by  the  Saturnian  rings 
come  naturally  to  be  dealt  with. 

Let  it  be  remembered  that  in  considering  the  Moon's 
motions  the  mathematician  has  to  shew  how  the  various 
influences  exerted  upon  her,  cause  the  Moon  to  travel  on 
a  path  continually  varying  in  shape  and  position,  her  own 
motion  in  this  path  being  also  variable.  And  mathemati- 
cians had  satisfied  themselves  that  in  whatever  way  the 
Moon's  motions  may  be  thus  affected,  there  is  no  risk  what- 
ever that  she  will  be  so  perturbed  on  her  path  as  to  come 
into  collision  with  the  Earth  at  any  future  time.  In  the 
case  of  Saturn's  rings  the  mathematician  had  to  inquire 
how,  supposing  these  rings  to  be  solid  formations,  they 
circle  as  they  do  around  Saturn  ;  and  whether  solid  rings 
so  circling  would  be  safe  from  destruction. 

The  great  mathematician  Laplace,  who  was  the  first  to 


Saturn  ami  its  System.  1 49 

deal  successfully  with  this  problem,  arrived  at  the  conclu- 
sion that  the  two  great  rings  known  in  his  day  cannot 
possibly  be  two  solid  rings.  He  shewed  that  they  must 
be  divided  into  several  rings,  otherwise  they  could  not 
continue  to  circle  safely,  as  they  do,  around  the  planet's 
globe.  But  he  shewed  that  another  very  strange  relation 
must  hold,  in  the  case  of  each  member  of  this  multiple 
ring-system.  Every  single  ring  must  be  eccentrically 
weighted.  A  perfectly  uniform  ring  would  be  soon 
destroyed  by  the  attractions  to  which  it  would  be 
subjected. 

There  for  awhile  the  problem  rested.  But  when  the 
dark  ring  was  discovered,  mathematicians  again  began  to 
examine  the  subject.  For  the  transparency  of  this  ring 
suggested  the  idea  that  it,  at  least,  might  be  a  fluid  ring. 
Professors  Bond  and  Pierce  in  America  discussed  the 
chances  which  a  fluid  ring  would  have  of  continuing  to 
circle  safely  around  so  mighty  an  attracting  body  as 
Saturn.  In  discussing  this  matter,  Professor  Pierce  had 
to  go  over  the  same  ground  as  Laplace ;  and  pushing  his 
inquiries  further,  (which  he  was  enabled  to  do  by  the  great 
advance  which  had  in  the  interval  taken  place  in  the 
mastery  of  such  mathematical  problems  as  were  involved) 
he  found  that  the  ring-system  must  be  composed  of  many 
more  rings  than  even  Laplace  had  imagined. 

On  March  23rd,  1855,  the  subject  of  the  Saturnian 
ring-system  (in  the  particular  mathematical  aspect  we 
have  spoken  of)  was  chosen  by  the  University  of  Cam- 
bridge as  the  subject  of  the  Adams  Prize  Essay.  In  1857 


1 50  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

the  prize  was  adjudged  to  Professor  J.  Clerk  Maxwell. 
He  shewed  that  the  eccentricity  indicated  by  Laplace  as  a 
necessary  feature  of  the  structure  of  each  ring,  must  be 
so  considerable,  that  the  ring-system  could  not  possibly 
appear  as  it  actually  does.  Moreover,  the  slightest  cause 
would  be  sufficient '  to  destroy  the  nice  adjustment  of  the 
load,  and  with  it  the  stability  of  the  ring.' 

Next,  Professor  Maxwell  also  discussed  the  probability 
that  the  rings  may  be  fluid.  He  found  that  oceanic  rings 
poised  in  mid-space  around  a  mighty  attracting  mass  like 
Saturn,  would  inevitably  be  wave-tossed,  and  that  the 
waves  would  so  increase  that  the  rings  would  be  broken 
up  into  separate  fluid  masses. 

We  thus  see  that  an  inquiry  instituted  with  the  object 
of  explaining  how  solid  continuous  rings  could  be 
maintained,  as  the  Saturnian  rings  manifestly  are  main- 
tained, about  a  vast  and  massive  central  orb,  ended  in 
demonstrating  that  the  rings  are  not  continuous,  but  must 
consist  at  present — even  if  they  have  not  consisted  always 
— of  a  multitude  of  separate  bodies,  which  may  be  either 
solid  or  fluid.  Of  course  there  is  nothing  in  this  con- 
clusion to  prevent  us  from  believing  that  the  rings  may  be 
partly  vaporous. 

But  a  rather  singular  result  appears  to  follow  from  the 
inquiries  which  Professor  Maxwell  further  instituted  into 
the  conditions  under  which  rings  of  satellites  would  exist. 
He  finds  reasons  for  believing  that  such  rings  would 
gradually  grow  wider,  by  an  extension  inwards,  and  thus 
be  eventually  though  very  slowly  (and  perhaps  not 


Saturn  and  its  System.  1 5 1 

completely)  destroyed.  It  certainly  seems  reasonable  to 
believe  that  in  the  dark  ring  we  have  evidence  that  some 
such  process  is  actually  taking  place.  For,  though  we 
find  that  this  ring  must  have  been  in  existence  long 
before  it  was  discovered,  (indeed  many  hundreds  of  years 
must  needs  have  been  required  for  the  formation  of  so 
vast  a  ring),  yet  it  is  very  difficult  to  believe  that  it  can 
have  been  so  conspicuous  when  Herschel  examined  Saturn 
with  his  great  reflectors  as  it  is  at  the  present  time.  He 
could  scarcely  have  overlooked  the  part  which  shows 
outside  the  planet's  disc,  had  this  been  the  case,  for  now 
under  favourable  atmospheric  conditions  this  part  can  be 
seen  with  a  four-inch  telescope.  Nor  is  it  at  all  likely 
that  he  would,  in  that  case,  have  mistaken  the  part  which 
extends  across  the  disc  for  a  dark  belt  on  Saturn,  as 
actually  happened.  It  seems  almost  certain,  then,  that 
during  the  last  sixty  or  seventy  years  this  dark  ring  has 
been  continually  growing  more  and  more  conspicuous — in 
other  words,  that  it  has  been  growing  wider,  and  that 
more  and  more  satellites  of  the  uncounted  *  millions 
forming  the  ring-system,  have  been  compelled  to  take  up 
their  abode  within  the  domain  of  this  particular  ring. 

It  is  a  circumstance  well  worthy  of  attention  that  the 
great  division  between  the  rings,  instead  of  being  black  as 
it  was  formerly  supposed  to  be,  is  found  to  be  merely 
very  dark  brown  or  brownish  purple.  This  shews  that 
within  the  zone  (1500  miles  wide)  which  forms  this  divi- 
sion there  must  be  at  all  times  many  satellites,  perhaps 
stragglers  from  those  belonging  to  the  adjacent  bright  rings. 


1 5  2  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

Another  very  singular  circumstance  has  been  noticed 
when  the  rings  have  been  turned  edgewise.  At  this  time 
the  fine  bright  line  forming  the  side-view  of  the  ring- 
system  has  been  seen  to  be  bordered  by  a  faint  misty 
light,  growing  more  conspicuous  towards  the  inner  edge  of 
the  ring-system.  It  has  been  inferred,  and  the  inference 
seems  just,  that  this  appearance  is  caused  by  satellites 
travelling  (either  through  perturbations  or  from  the  effects 
of  collisions)  above  or  below  the  general  level  of  the  ring- 
system. 

This  essay  has  already  extended  to  a  greater  length 
than  I  had  proposed  when  I  began  ;  and  I  must  refrain 
from  entering  into  any  general  consideration  of  the  ring- 
system  regarded  as  a  Saturnian  appendage.  I  shall 
merely  remark,  therefore,  that  I  have  been  able  to  shew 
by  a  careful  mathematical  examination  of  the  subject,  the 
results  of  which  are  presented  pictorially  and  tabularly 
in  my  treatise  on  Saturn,  that  the  shadows  thrown  by  the 
rings  must  cover  wide  Saturnian  regions  for  many  years 
continuously,  and  this  in  the  very  heart  of  the  Saturnian 
winter.  Thus  in  Saturnian  latitude  40°,  corresponding  to 
the  latitude  of  Madrid  on  our  earth,  the  sun  begins  to  be 
eclipsed  about  three  years  after  the  autumnal  equinox.* 
For  a  while  there  are  only  morning  and  evening  eclipses 
— that  is,  the  days  already  shortening  with  the  approach  of 
winter  are  still  further  shortened  by  eclipses  caused  by 

•  It  will  be  remembered  that  the  Saturnian  seasons  are  more  than 
seven  years  in  length,  and  that  from  the  autumnal  to  the  vernal 
equinox  is  a  period  of  nearly  fifteen  years. 


Saturn  and  its  System.  153 

the  rings.  These  morning  and  evening  eclipses  gradually 
grow  longer  and  longer,  until  about  a  year  has  passed,  by 
which  time  they  last  through  the  whole  of  the  Saturnian 
day,  now  transformed  to  night.  This  state  of  things 
continues  for  nearly  seven  years — more  exactly  (according 
to  my  calculations)  for  six  years  236  days — during,  the 
whole  of  which  time  the  sun  is  altogether  concealed  from 
view,  unless  now  and  then  for  a  moment  he  can  be  partly 
seen  between  the  satellites  which  compose  the  rings. 
From  the  blackness  of  the  shadow  thrown  by  the  rings, 
however,  it  is  very  unlikely  that  gaps  through  which  the 
sun  may  thus  be  seen  are  at  all  common.  After  these 
6i  years  of  what  must  be  regarded  as  practically  total 
eclipse,  the  morning  and  evening  eclipses  begin  again,  and 
gradually  last  for  a  shorter  and  shorter  time,  until  about 
three  years  before  the  vernal  equinox.  Then  for  about 
twenty  years,  which  includes  the  long  Saturnian  summer, 
the  sun  is  not  eclipsed  by  the  rings;  moreover,  as  he 
begins  to  illuminate  the  visible  side  of  the  rings,  at  the 
Saturnian  vernal  equinox,  it  follows  that  during  the 
Saturnian  summer  nights  the  ring  appears  as  a  band  of 
brightness  on  the  Saturnian  sky,  except  where  the  broad 
shadow  of  the  planet  falls  upon  it. 

The  circumstances  here  considered  seem  to  accord  with 
what  has  been  already  noticed  in  the  case  of  the  satellites. 
The  ring-system  does  not  seem  calculated  to  render 
Saturn's  globe  a  more  convenient  place  for  living 
creatures.  On  the  contrary,  a  portion  of  that  small 
supply  of  light  which  Saturn  receives  from  the  Sun  is 


1 54  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

intercepted  by  the  rings  precisely  at  the  period  when, 
according  to  our  ideas,  it  would  be  most  desirable  that  the 
supply  would  be  increased ;  while  again  throughout  the 
Saturuian  winter  nights  the  ring-system  supplies  no  light 
whatever,  but  blots  out  many  hundreds  of  stars  from  view. 

The  just  inference  would  appear  to  be  that  either  Saturn 
is  altogether  uninhabitated,  or  that  the  creatures  inhabiting 
the  planet  are  so  different  from  any  with  which  we  are 
acquainted,  that  we  can  form  no  estimate  of  their  require- 
ments. To  use  Sir  John  Herschel's  words,  "  We  shall  do 
wrong  to  judge  of  the  fitness  or  unfitness  of  their  condition 
from  what  we  see  around  us,  when  perhaps  the  very  com- 
binations which  convey  to  our  minds  only  images  of  horror, 
may  be  in  reality  theatres  of  the  most  striking  and  glorious 
displays  of  beneficent  contrivance."  I  would  venture  to 
point  out  that  the  view  which  I  advocated  respecting 
Jupiter  and  Saturn  in  the  "  Expanse  of  Heaven,"  would 
at  once  remove  all  doubts  as  to  the  beneficence  of  the 
arrangements  described  above.  If  Saturn  is  a  secondary 
sun  to  his  satellites,  the  ring-system  would  not  only 
interfere  in  no  way  with  his  action  in  this  respect,  but 
might  well  be  the  very  source  whence  a  large  part  of 
Saturn's  energy  as  a  sun  may  be  derived.  The  downfall 
of  satellites  from  time  to  time  out  of  the  ring-system, 
after  collisions  or  excessive  perturbations,  would  at  least 
be  a  source  of  heat  not  to  be  neglected  in  considering 
Saturn's  position  as  a  subordinate  sun. 

I  shall  draw  this  essay  to  a  close  by  quoting  a  descrip- 
tion of  the  colours  observable  in  Saturn's  system  when 


•  Saturn  and  Us  System.  155 

suitable  telescopic  power  is  employed.  It  is  from  the  pen  of 
Mr  Browning,  the  well-known  optician.  "The  rings,"  he 
says/'  are  yellow-ochre  shaded  with  the  same  and  sepia ;  the 
globe,  yellow-ochre  and  brown  madder,  orange  and  purple, 
shaded  with  sepia ;  the  crape-ring,  purple  madder  and 
sepia ;  the  great  division  in  the  rings,  sepia.  The  pole 
and  the  narrow  belts,  situated  near  to  it  on  the  globe,  pale 
cobalt  blue.  These  tints  are  the  nearest  I  could  find  to 
represent  those  seen  on  the  planet ;  but  there  is  a  muddi- 
iiess  about  all  terrestrial  colours,  when  compared  with  the 
colours  of  objects  seen  in  the  skies.  These  colours  could 
not  be  seen  in  their  brilliancy  and  purity,  unless  we 
could  dip  our  pencil  in  a  rainbow,  and  transfer  the  pris- 
matic tints  to  our  paper." 


A  GIANT  SUN. 

To  those  who  are  acquainted  with  the  teachings  of 
astronomy  respecting  the  mighty  ruler  of  our  planetary 
scheme,  the  title  of  this  essay  may  appear  strange.  For 
assuredly  our  sun  must  himself  be  considered  as  a  giant 
orb — giant  in  size,  as  Sir  John  Herschel  says  in  his  charm- 
ing "  Familiar  Lectures,"  and  giant  in  strength,  but  withal 
a  benevolent  giant,  being  "  the  almoner  of  the  Almighty, 
the  delegated  dispenser  to  us  of  light  and  warmth,  the 
immediate  source  of  all  our  comforts,  and  indeed  of  the 
very  possibility  of  our  existence."  How,  then,  it  may  be 
asked,  can  any  other  orb  be  called  by  way  of  distinction 
a  giant  sun,  as  though  the  sun  which  rules  our  day  were 
but  a  dwarf?  It  seemed  fitting  that,  in  speaking  of  Jupiter 
in  the  "  Expanse  of  Heaven,"  I  should  describe  his  mighty 
orb  as  a  miniature  sun ;  for  vast  as  is  the  bulk  of  Jupiter, 
he  seems  dwarfed  into  insignificance  when  compared  with 
the  sun's  inconceivably  magnificent  globe.  A  thousand 
Jupiters  would  not  make  up  the  volume  of  the  sun,  nor 
would  the  mass  of  a  thousand  Jupiters  outweigh  his,  if 
masses  so  mighty  could  be  balanced  against  each  other. 
But  to  speak  of  any  other  orb  as  a  giant  sun,  would  seem 
to  imply  that  there  exists  in  the  universe  a  globe  bearing 


A  Giant  Sun.  157 

some  such  relation  to  the  sun  as  the  sun  bears  to  Jupiter, 
or  Jupiter  to  the  relatively  minute  orb  on  which  we  live. 

Incredible  as  the  idea  of  such  a  globe  may  be,  however, 
it  is  with  precisely  such  a  globe  that  I  propose  now  to  deal. 
Mighty  as  is  the  orb  of  the  sun,  I  am  to  speak  of  an  orb 
more  than  a  thousand  times  vaster.  Grand  as  is  the  scheme 
ruled  by  the  sun,  and  inconceivable  as  are  the  forces  exerted 
by  the  sun  upon  the  orbs  which  circle  round  him,  I  am 
to  describe  a  sun  which  exerts  forces  many  times  more 
mighty  on  orbs  which  themselves  probably  exceed  our  sun 
in  mass  and  volume.  Magnificent  as  is  the  conception 
that  our  sun  with  his  attendant  family  of  planets  is  sweep- 
ing through  space  at  the  rate  of  two  or  three  hundred  miles 
in  each  minute  of  time,  the  sun  of  which  I  am  about  to 
write  carries  a  far  mightier  train  through  space  at  a  rate 
many  times  greater. 

If  the  reader  of  these  lines  had  turned  his  eyes  towards 
the  south  at  about  nine  o'clock  on  a  clear  evening  in  the 
beginning  of  Febuary  1871,  he  would  have  seen  two  orbs 
which  far  outshone  all  others  in  the  heavens.  High  up  in 
the  sky,  and  not  far  from  the  twin  stars,  Castor  and  Pollux, 
the  planet  Jupiter  was  shining  with  a  steadfast  lustre 
which  distinguished  him  almost  as  markedly  as  his  superior 
brilliancy  from  all  the  stars  in  his  vicinity.  Low  down 
and  almost  vertically  beneath  the  kingly  planet,  was  a 
star  which,  though  not  matching  Jupiter  in  actual  brilli- 
ancy, surpassed  him  in  beauty.  For  this  star — the  famous 
Dog-star  of  the  ancients — glows  with  a  light  which  con- 
tinually changes  in  apparent  colour.  At  one  moment  it 


1 58  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

appears  unmistakably  red,  at  another  a  pure  green,  at 
another  a  sapphire  blue — though  these  colours  last  but  for 
an  instant,  while,  during  somewhat  longer  intervals,  the 
light  of  the  star  is  white.  Poets  in  all  ages  have  noticed 
this  peculiarity  of  the  light  of  Sirius,  from  Homer  who 
compared  the  fiery  lustre  of  the  arms  of  Diomede  with  the 
splendour  of  the  autumn  star,  "  When  new  risen  from  the 
waves  of  ocean,"  *  to  our  poet-laureate,  who  sings  of  Arac 
and  his  brothers,  that 

"  As  the  fiery  Sirius  alters  hue 
And  bickers  into  red  and  emerald,  shone 
Their  morions,  wash'd  with  morning,  as  they  came." 

It  is  difficult  to  conceive  that  this  orb,  brightly  as  it 
shines,  so  far  surpasses  in  volume  the  magnificent  planet 
which,  in  1871,  outshone  it  in  the  higher  heavens,  that 
the  very  drawing  by  which  astronomers  are  in  the  habit  of 


•  In  the  lines  referred  to  Homer  seems  to  describe  Sirius  as  shining 
more  brightly  when  newly,  risen  than  at  any  other  time  ;  and  a  com- 
mentator remarks  unhesitatingly,  and  as  though  recording  some  well- 
attested  astronomical  fact,  that  Sirius  "shone  brightest  at  its  rising." 
I  am  not  sure  that  the  words  of  Homer  will  bear  this  interpretation, 
since  the  word  translated  "brightly"  may  equally  bear  the  meaning 
"splendidly," — that  is,  may  not  relate  to  the  quantity  of  light  actually 
received  from  the  star,  but  to  the  beauty  of  the  star's  appearance.  It 
is,  of  course,  not  the  case  that  Sirius  (either  as  seen  here  or  in  any 
country)  shines  most  brightly  when  newly  risen  ;  though  certainly  the 
star  appears  more  beautiful  when  near  the  horizon,  its  changes  of  colour 
being  then  better  marked  and  succeeding  eaoh  other  more  rapidly.  A 
similar  remark  applies  to  Arcturus,  Vega,  and  Capella,  the  three  stars 
which  come  next  to  Sirius  in  brilliancy.  Indeed  the  remark  applies  to 
all  stars  bright  enough  to  shew  well  through  the  denser  air  close  by  the 
horizon. 


A  Giant  Sun.  159 

indicating  the  insignificance  of  our  earth  compared  with 
the  sun,  might  be  employed  to  indicate  the  inferiority  of 
Jupiter  as  compared  with  Sirius.  Yet  even  this  fact  (for 
such  it  is),  amazing  as  it  must  appear,  sinks  into  insignifi- 
cance beside  the  fact  that  Sirius  is  a  sun  many  times  more 
splendid  than  our  own.  That  beautiful  star,  which  even 
in  the  most  powerful  telescope  man  can  construct,  appears 
as  a  mere  point  of  light,  is  in  reality  a  globe  emitting  so 
enormous  a  quantity  of  light  and  heat,  that  if  it  were  to  take 
the  place  of  our  sun  every  creature  on  this  earth  would  be 
destroyed  by  its  fiery  rays. 

Before  proceeding  to  consider  the  discoveries  relating  to 
Sirius  which  have  rewarded  the  labours  of  modern  astro- 
nomers, it  may  be  interesting  to  inquire  briefly  into  the 
ideas  of  the  ancients  respecting  this  splendid  orb — the 
more  so  that,  if  we  are  to  accept  the  descriptions  given  by 
ancient  writers  as  literally  exact,  we  must  conceive  that 
the  star  has,  during  the  last  two  thousand  years,  under- 
gone a  change  of  the  most  marvellous  kind. 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  ancients  should  have  regarded 
Sirius  as  comparable  with  the  sun  in  regard  to  the 
influence  which  it  exerts  upon,  the  earth.  For  instance, 
Sirius  was  supposed  to  produce  the  unhealthy  weather 
prevalent  in  many  parts  of  Italy  during  the  autumnal 
-\months.  Yet  the  influence  of  the  star  was  not  in  all 
countries  regarded  as  baneful ;  for  the  Egyptians  ascribed 
the  inundations  of  the  Nile  to  Sirius,  and  were  thus  led  to 
worship  the  star  as  a  deity.  The  dog-days  began  at  the 
part  of  the  year  \vhen  the  star  rose  just  as  the  sky  was 


1 60  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

beginning  to  grow  too  bright  for  any  stars  to  be  seen. 
So  that  the  mischievous  effects  assigned  to  these  Canicular 
Days  were  associated,  not  with  the  time  when  the  star 
shone  most  conspicuously  at  night,  but  with  the  season 
when  it  was  known  that  Sirius  was  above  the  horizon  in 
the  day-time. 

But  if  it  is  perplexing  to  understand  how  the  ancients 
came  to  regard  the  rays  of  Sirius  as  thus  potent,  either  for 
evil  or  for  good,  it  is  even  more  difficult  to  understand 
how  Manilius  was  led  to  anticipate  the  results  of  modern 
astronomical  research  by  boldly  suggesting  that  Sirius  is  a 
sun  comparable  with  our  own  in  splendour.  Sherburne 
thus  translates  the  words  of  Manilius  about  Sirius : — 

"  'Tis  strongly  credited  this  owns  a  light 
And  runs  a  course  not  than  the  sun's  less  bright, 
But  that  removed  from  sight  so  great  a  way 
It  seems  to  cast  a  dim  and  weaker  ray. " 

The  question  whether,  as  some  suppose,  Sirius  has 
changed  in  colour  since  the  days  of  the  ancient  astro- 
nomers, is  of  extreme  interest  and  importance.  Unfortun- 
ately the  evidence  is  far  from  satisfactory.  If  the  ancients 
had  been  a  little  more  careful  in  describing  the  phenomena 
of  the  heavens,  it  is  probable  that  many  results  which  are 
at  present  being  slowly  evolved  by  careful  and  laborious 
observation,  would  admit  of  being  at  once  and  satis- 
factorily determined.  Amongst  these  must  be  included 
the  question  whether  any  of  the  larger  stars  are  changing 
in  colour.  Whatever  changes  are  taking  place  are 
unquestionably  slight,  and  proceed  very  slowly.  They  are 


A  Giant  Sun.  161 

therefore  not  easy  to  detect ;  for  it  is  difficult  to  prove 
that  the  observer's  estimate  of  colour  has  remained 
unchanged  during  the  whole  series  of  observations.  The 
difficulty  is  still  greater  when  different  observers  have 
been  at  work ;  for  two  persons  can  scarcely  be  found 
whose  estimates  of  all  hues  and  tints  are  exactly  alike. 
But  it  is  not  impossible  that  in  considerable  intervals  of 
time — for  instance,  in  two  thousand  years — changes  too 
marked  to  be  thus  misapprehended  may  take  place.  A 
star  with  a  well-marked  red  or  yellow  tint  may  become 
white  or  green,  or  a  white  star  may  become  ruddy  or  blue, 
and  so  on.  So  that  if  the  ancients  had  left  us  a  clear 
statement  of  the  hues  of  all  the  leading  stars,  we  might 
have  been  enabled  to  determine  very  satisfactorily 
whether  any  of  these  orbs  had  changed  in  colour  or  tint. 

Now  at  a  first  view  of  the  accounts  given  by  the  ancients 
respecting  Sirius,  it  appears  plain  that  the  star  must  have 
changed  in  colour.  At  present  Sirius,  when  high  above 
the  horizon  (as  seen,  therefore,  in  southern  latitudes),  is 
unmistakably  white.  But  Aratus  and  Ptolemy,  Seneca 
and  Cicero,  Virgil,  Horace,  and  Ovid,  agree  in  using  terms 
which,  as  ordinarily  understood,  imply  redness  or  even  a 
ruddy  purple  tint.  Nay,  Ptolemy  says  distinctly  that 
Sirius  was  of  the  same  colour  as  the  star  Antares  (the 
Scorpion's  Heart),  now  sometimes  described  as  a  red 
Sirius ;  and  Seneca  said  that  the  redness  of  Sirius  was 
more  marked  than  that  of  Mars.  But  unfortunately  we 
have  no  evidence  to  shew  that  the  redness  here  referred 
to  was  other  than  that  red  lustre  with  which  the  star  glows 


1 62  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

from  time  to  time  when  near  the  horizon.  If  one  of  these 
authors  had  but  stated  what  is  the  colour  of  Sirius  when 
high  enough  above  the  horizon  to  shine  without  scintilla- 
tion, it  is  probable  that  a  conclusion,  bearing  most  signifi- 
cantly not  merely  on  questions  respecting  the  stars,  but  on 
the  condition  of  our  own  sun,  would  have  been  established. 
If  we  accept  the  conclusion  that  Sirius  was  a  red  star  two 
thousand  years  ago,  we  cannot  but  look  with  some  mis- 
giving on  the  question  whether  our  own  sun  may  not  one 
day  change  likewise  in  colour — a  question  of  grave  import- 
ance to  the  human  race.  For  the  colour  of  a  sun  is 
closely  related  to  the  quality  of  the  rays  which  it  emits. 
We  receive  at  present  from  our  sun,  in  certain  proportions, 
rays  which  produce  the  effects  of  heat,  and  light,  and 
chemical  action  ;  and  these  several  effects  correspond  with 
the  parts  of  the  solar  spectrum  coloured,  respectively,  red, 
and  yellow,  and  indigo.  Or  rather,  the  rays  from  the  red 
and  orange  part  of  the  solar  spectrum  are  more  heating 
than  light-giving,  and  produce  scarcely  any  chemical  action 
whatever ;  *  the  rays  from  the  orange-yellow,  yellow  and 
yellow-green  part  excite  more  light  than  heat  or  chemical 
action;  and  the  rays  from  the  blue,  indigo,  and  violet 


*  The  photographer  takes  advantage  of  this  circumstance  to  obtain 
chemical  darkness  (BO  to  speak)  without  the  inconvenience  of  optical 
darkness.  For  by  means  of  orange-coloured  glass  he  can  exclude  all 
light  which  would  produce  the  least  change  in  his  chemicals.  Orange 
yellow  hangings  are  as  well  suited  as  black  hangings  would  be  for  a 
photographic  dark  room.  It  is  owing  to  the  same  peculiarity  that  we 
are  not  always  quite  satisfied  with  the  photographs  of  our  ruddy 
cheeked  children. 


A  Giant  Sun.  163 

portion  excite  more  chemical  action  than  light,  and 
scarcely  any  heat  whatever.  Hence,  if  our  sun  changed 
in  colour,  his  rays  would  supply  more  heat  or  else  produce 
a  more  intense  chemical  action  than  at  present ;  and  it  is 
by  no  means  clear  that  such  a  change  would  be  advantage- 
ous to  the  inhabitants  of  this  earth. 

Before  leaving  this  part  of  our  subject,  it  may  be  men- 
tioned, as  bearing  on  the  probability  whether  Sirius  has 
changed  in  colour  or  not,  that  certain  variable  stars> 
do  change  systematically  in  colour — though  in  a  period 
so  short,  that  they  are  somewhat  removed  from  comparison 
with  Sirius  and  his  supposed  change  during  the  past  two 
thousand  years.  The  Wonderful  Star  (Mira)  in  the  "Whale 
becomes  yellowish  as  it  loses  brightness,  and  as  its  lustre 
returns  gradually  resumes  its  whiteness. 

Let  us  now  turn,  however,  to  the  researches  of  modern 
astronomers  into  the  nature  and  physical  condition  of  this 
magnificent  orb. 

Owing  to  the  superior  brilliancy  of  Sirius,  it  was  natural 
that  astronomers  should  be  led  to  regard  this  star  as  nearer 
to  us  than  any  other  in  the  heavens.  But  Sirius  is  not 
well  placed  for  observation  from  European  stations,  and 
accordingly  when  astronomers  first  attempted  to  estimate 
the  distance  of  a  fixed  star,  they  did  not  select  Sirius  for 
the  experiment.  One  notices  in  their  remarks  respecting 
Sirius,  however,  a  sort  of  tacit  assumption,  that  at  whatever 
distance  they  might  find  any  actually  observed  star  to  lie, 
Sirius  must  be  regarded  as  at  a  less  distance. 

But  as  the  great  problem  (the  most  difficult  observa- 
8 


1 64  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

tional  problem  ever  attacked  by  astronomers)  began  to  be 
mastered,  it  was  recognised  that  Sinus  is  by  no  means  the 
nearest  of  the  fixed  stars.  Nay,  this  general  conclusion 
began  to  be  recognised,  that  the  brightness  of  a  star  is  no 
sufficient  criterion  of  relative  proximity.  The  first  star 
whose  distance  was  actually  determined  was  one  which 
can  only  be  just  seen  on  clear  moonless  nights  by  persons 
having  ordinary  powers  of  eyesight.  And  though  the  star 
next  dealt  with  (the  nearest  of  all  so  far  as  is  known)  is  a 
very  brilliant  orb,  yet  its  lustre  falls  far  short  of  that  of 
Sirius.  In  fact,  according  to  the  first  published  estimate 
of  the  distance  of  Sirius  there  are  three  stars  so  minute  as 
to  be  actually  invisible  to  the  unaided  eye,  which  yet  lie 
nearer  to  us  than  this  brightest  of  all  the  fixed  stars. 

It  would  appear,  however,  from  the  careful  researches 
applied  to  the  matter  in  recent  times,  that  the  distance  of 
Sirius  had  been  over-estimated,  and  that  as  a  matter  of 
fact  this  star  must  be  set  third  in  order  of  distance, — 
among  those  stars  at  least  whose  distances  astronomers 
have  attempted  to  determine.  According  to  these  later 
estimates,  while  the  distance  of  the  nearest  of  all  stars  (so 
far  as  is  known)  must  be  set  at  some  twenty-two  millions 
of  millions  of  miles,  the  distance  of  Sirius  is  about  eighty 
millions  of  millions  of  miles. 

I  have  spoken  of  the  erroneous  estimate  of  the  distance 
of  Sirius.  It  may  be  well,  in  passing,  to  consider  the 
nature  and  extent  of  the  probable  error.  We  have  heard 
no  little  astonishment  expressed  because  astronomers  have 
detected  an  error  of  some  three  millions  of  miles  in  their 


A  Giant  Sun.  165 

estimate  of  the  sun's  distance.  It  appears  inexplicable  to 
many  that  such  an  error  as  this  is  in  reality  altogether 
trivial — the  real  wonder  being  that  astronomers  should 
have  come  within  several  millions  of  miles  of  the  truth. 
But  if  the  error  in  the  estimate  of  the  sun's  distance  appears 
startling,  what  will  be  thought  of  an  error  which  must  be 
estimated  by  millions  of  millions  of  miles?  Such,  however, 
is  the  case  as  respects  Sirius.  If  the  estimate  of  the  star's 
distance  which  formerly  was  accepted  (and  even  now 
appears  in  many  of  the  best  astronomical  treatises  extant) 
were  correct,  the  distance  of  Sirius  would  amount  to  about 
130  millions  of  millions  of  miles ;  the  corrected  estimate 
is  as  above  mentioned  80  millions  of  millions.  The 
difference  is  some  half  a  million  times  larger  than  the 
sun's  distance  from  the  earth. 

It  may  be  asked,  then,  by  the  reader,  whether  there 
must  not  have  been  some  gross  blundering  on  the  part  of 
astronomers.  Nay,  if  unfamiliar  with  the  actual  nature 
of  the  problem  which  astronomers  have  had  to  deal  with, 
he  may  even  be  disposed  to  believe  that  there  is  something 
after  all  in  the  outcry  of  those  loud-voiced  persons  who 
denounce  the  Astronomer  Eoyal  and  the  Eoyal  Observa- 
tory, and  who  assert  that  every  shilling  devoted  by 
Government  to  the  support  of  observational  astronomy  is 
thrown  away.  A  few  words  of  explanation,  however,  will 
probably  remove  this  impression. 

What  the  astronomer  has  to  do  in  order  to  determine 
the  distance  of  a  star  is  to  notice  whether  in  the  course  of 
the  year  the  star  seems  to  shift  its  apparent  place  on  the 


1 66  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

celestial  sphere.  The  earth  circuits  her  wide  path  round 
the  sun  once  in  each  year,  and  therefore  the  astronomer 
really  sees  each  star  from  a  shifting  point  of  view.  So 
that  each  star  must  be  really  seen  in  different  directions  at 
different  seasons  of  the  year,  only  most  of  the  stars  are  so  far 
off  that  this  change  of  direction  is  altogether  inappreciable. 
In  the  case  of  Sirius  the  change  is  just  appreciable  and 
that  is  all  that  can  be  said.  As  Sir  John  Herschel  has 
stated,  "  Sirius  and  Arcturus,  the  two  brightest  stars  visible 
in  our  hemisphere,  stand  barely  within  the  limits  of  any 
estimation  approaching  to  certainty."  The  annual  dis- 
placement of  Sirius  may  be  thus  illustrated  : — On  a  clear 
moonlight  night  let  the  reader  notice  the  apparent  diameter 
of  the  moon.  Next  let  him  try  to  conceive  that  diameter 
divided  into  about  3,800  equal  parts.  Then  the  greatest 
displacement  of  Sirius  is  equal  to  one  of  those  minute 
portions.  Sirius  in  fact  appears  to  circle  round  a  minute 
oval  path  on  the  heavens,  having  for  its  longest  diameter 
a  space  equal  to  about  the  3,800th  part  of  the  moon's 
apparent  diameter.  Now  the  error  of  the  earlier  estimate 
(supposing  that  estimate  erroneous)  consisted  in  setting 
the  displacement  of  Sirius  at  about  the  6,300th  part  of 
the  moon's  diameter, — the  difference  between  the  two 
estimates  corresponding  to  about  the  9,500th  part  of 
the  moon's  apparent  diameter.  If  the  reader  will  but 
conceive  the  moon's  apparent  diameter  divided  into  about 
100  parts,  and  one  of  these  parts  again  into  100  parts,  he 
will  be  able  to  form  an  idea  of  the  exceeding  minuteness  of 
the  quantity  by  which  astronomers  suppose  that  their  first 


A  Giant  Sun.  167 

estimate  was  erroneous.  But  most  probably  the  truth 
lies  between  the  two  estimates,  so  that  the  actual  error 
of  each  is  only  about  half  this  exceedingly  minute 
quantity.* 

Le.t  us  assume  as  the  probable  distance  of  Sirius,  a 
value  between  those  which  have  been  mentioned  above, — 
to  wit,  100  millions  of  millions  of  miles. 

If  astronomers  could  measure  the  disc  of  Sirius,  their 
knowledge  of  the  star's  distance  would  of  course  enable 
them  at  once  to  calculate  the  real  diameter  of  the  star. 
But  in  the  most  powerful  telescope  Sirius  appears  as  little 
more  than  a  mere  point  of  light ;  and  it  is  well  known  to 
astronomers  that  even  the  almost  evanescent  dimensions 
of  the  disc  are  not  real,  but  merely  optical.  In  fact,  the 

*  It  must  be  stated  clearly,  however,  that  though  no  discredit  what- 
ever can  attach  to  astronomers  for  failing  to  determine  exactly  quantities 
which  are  in  reality  all  but  evanescent,  yet  no  more  reliance  must  be 
placed  on  the  estimates  of  star-distances  than  shall  appear  to  be  justified 
by  the  accordance  of  different  and  independent  determinations.  In  the 
present  instance  the  results  not  being  accordant,  we  cannot  possibly 
admit  that  the  distance  of  Sirius  has  been  satisfactorily  determined.  A 
similar  remark  applies  to  the  case  of  that  star  barely  visible  to  the  un- 
aided eye,  which  I  have  mentioned  as  the  nearest  of  all  the  stars  in  the 
northern  heavens.  The  mean  of  the  best  recent  observations  differs 
markedly  from  the  value  which  had  been  judged  so  trustworthy  that 
Sir  John  Herschel  quoted  it  with  confidence  in  his  "Outlines  of 
Astronomy."  The  star  has,  in  fact,  been  set  at  two-thirds  of  the 
distance  formerly  assigned  to  it.  So  long  as  such  discrepancies  exist  we 
cannot  speak  with  any  confidence  of  a  star's  distance.  But  this  very  star 
is  the  nearest  but  one  of  all  the  stars  astronomers  have  dealt  with.  So 
that  the  startling,  but  inevitable  conclusion  is  deduced  that  there  is  but 
one  star  in  the  heavens  of  whose  distance  astronomers  have  any  definite 
ideas.  This  star  is  the  one  known  as  Alpha  Centauri ;  and  hitherto  all 
observations  agree  in  placing  it  at  about  twenty -two  millions  of  millions 
of  miles  from  the  earth. 


1 68  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

more  powerful  and  perfect  the  telescope  the  smaller  does 
Sirius  appear,  though  its  light  is  greatly  increased.  Sir 
"William  Herschel  tells  us  that  "  when  Sirius  was  about  to 
enter  the  field  of  view  of-  his  forty-feet  reflector,  the  light 
resembled  that  which  announces  the  approach  of  sunrise," 
and  when  the  field  of  view  was  fairly  entered  "  the  star 
appeared  in  all  the  splendour  of  the  rising  sun,  so  that  it 
was  impossible  to  behold  it  without  pain  to  the  eye."  In 
the  great  Eosse  telescope  Sirius  blazes  with  an  even  greater 
splendour.  Yet  neither  of  these  instruments  could  "  raise 
a  disc  "  on  the  star. 

Nor  need  we  wonder  at  this,  if  we  consider  the  circum- 
stances of  the  case.  We  have  already  seen  that  the  wide 
sweep  of  the  earth  on  her  path  causes  Sirius  to  shift  but 
by  about  the  5,000th  part  of  the  moon's  apparent  diameter 
(taking  a  quantity  intermediate  between  the  two  values 
mentioned  above).  Now  this  signifies  that,  as  seen  from 
Sirius,  the  whole  span  of  the  earth's  orbit — though  upwards 
of  180,000,000  miles  in  extent — would  be  reduced  to  about 
the  5,000th  part  of  the  moon's  apparent  diameter.  It  follows 
of  course  that,  as  seen  from  the  earth,  a  globe  180,000,000 
miles  in  diameter,  at  the  distance  of  Sirius,  would  be  so 
reduced  as  to  have  an  apparent  diameter  equal  to  about 
the  5,000th  part  of  the  moon's.  Now  enormous  as  is  the 
bulk  of  Sirius,  no  astronomer  supposes  for  an  instant  that 
the  star  is  comparable  to  such  a  globe  as  I  have  here 
mentioned.  Such  a  globe  would  have  a  diameter  ex- 
ceeding our  sun's  some  210  times,  and  therefore  a  volume 
exceeding  his  some  9,500,000  times,  which  is  utterly  in- 


A  Giant  Sun.  169 

credible.  Assigning  to  Sirius  a  diameter  exceeding  our 
sun's  10  times  (and  therefore  a  volume,  exceeding  his  1,000 
times),  it  would  result  that,  as  seen  from  the  earth,  Sirius 
has  an  apparent  diameter  equal  to  less  than  the  100,000th 
part  of  the  moon's  ;  and  no  telescope  in  existence  could 
show  so  minute  a  diameter  as  a  real  measurable  quantity. 
The  nominally  available  power  of  the  great  Eosse  telescope 
(6,000)  would,  indeed,  show  Sirius  with  a  diameter  equal  to 
about  the  16th  part  of  the  moon's — a  quantity  which  a  good 
eye  could  appreciate  in  the  case  of  a  globe  shining  no  more 
brightly  than  the  moon  does.  But  the  intrinsic  lustre  of 
Sirius  resembles  that  of  the  sun  when  shining  in  full 
splendour,  and  there  is  no  man  living  who  could  recognise 
as  a  disc  an  orb  shining  as  the  sun  does,  but  with  an 
apparent  diameter  equal  only  to  the  16th  part  of  his. 

How,  then,  it  may  be  asked,  can  astronomers  claim  to 
know  that  Sirius  is  an  orb  exceeding  our  sun  in  magni- 
tude ? 

Practically  it  is  impossible  for  astronomers  to  determine 
the  dimensions  of  Sirius  ;  but  by  comparing  the  amount 
of  light  received  from  him  with  that  received  from  our 
own  sun,  they  can  form  tolerably  safe  conclusions  as  to 
the  probable  dimensions  of  the  star.  They  have  only  to 
inquire  how  far  from  us  our  own  sun  should  be  placed  in 
order  to  shine  just  as  brightly  as  Sirius,  and  to  compare 
that  distance  with  the  actual  distance  of  Sirius,  in  order 
to  infer  whether  the  sun  or  Sirius  is  the  larger  orb,  and 
by  how  much  one  exceeds  the  other. 

The  only  estimate  which  need  be  here  considered  is 


1 70  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

that  which  results  from  combining  together  the  best 
modern  estimate  of  the  light  of  the  full  moon  as  compared 
with  the  sun's,  and  the  best  modern  estimate  of  the  light 
of  Sirius  as  compared  with  that  of  the  full  moon.  The 
former  estimate  is  due  to  the  indefatigable  German  light- 
student,  Dr  Zollner ;  the  latter  we  owe  to  Sir  John 
Herschel,  the  estimate  having  been  made  during  his  stay 
at  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope.  According  to  these  estimates 
the  light  of  Sirius  is  such  that  some  4,200,000,000  of 
stars,  each  as  bright  as  Sirius,  would  be  required  to 
supply  as  much  light  as  we  receive  from  the  sun.  Now 
the  distance  of  the  sun  is  about  91,500,000  of  miles  ;  and 
we  have  assigned  as  the  most  probable  distance  of  Sirius 
100  millions  of  millions:  100,000,000  contain  91  \  nearly 
1,100,000  times  and  Sirius  is  so  many  times  farther  from 
us  than  the  sun.  So  that  the  sun's  light  at  the  distance 
of  Sirius  would  be  reduced  in  the  proportion  of  this 
number  multiplied  into  itself  or  about  1,200,000  millions 
of  times  ;  and  so  many  orbs  as  large  and  bright  as  the 
sun  would  be  wanted  at  the  distance  of  Sirius  to  supply 
the  same  amount  of  light  as  the  sun  actually  supplies  to 
us.  We  have  seen,  however,  that  only  4,200,000,000  orbs 
as  large  and  bright  as  Sirius  would  be  needed  to  that  end. 
Hence  the  light  of  Sirius  must  exceed  the  light  of  the  sun 
(at  equal  distances)  in  the  same  degree  that  1,200,000  ex- 
ceeds 4,200,  or  about  286  times.  Assuming  an  equal 
degree  of  intrinsic  brightness — so  that  a  square  mile  of 
the  surface  of  Sirius  is  supposed  to  give  out  as  much  light 
as  a  square  mile  of  the  sun's  surface — it  follows  that 


A  Giant  Sun.  171 

at  equal  distances  the  disc  of  Sirius  exceeds  the  disc  of 
the  sun  286  times  in  size,  and  that  therefore  the  diameter 
of  Sirius  exceeds  that  of  the  sun  17  times.  If  this  be  the 
case — and  this  relation  must  d  priori  be  regarded  as  more 
probable  than  any  other — the  bulk  of  Sirius  exceeds  that 
of  the  sun  4,860  times. 

If  I  had  adopted  the  earlier  estimate  of  the  distance  of 
Sirius,  I  should  have  obtained  the  result  that  Sirius  gives 
out  400  times  as  much  light  as  the  sun,  and  has  a  volume 
exceeding  his  8,000  times.  These  are  the  values  adopted 
by  Sir  John  Herschel  in  his  "  Familiar  Essays."  On  the 
other  hand,  by  adopting  the  latest  estimate  of  the  distance 
of  Sirius,  I  should  have  obtained  (as  in  my  "Other 
"Worlds")  the  result  that  Sirius  gives  out  192  times  as 
much  light  as  the  sun,  and  exceeds  him  2,688  times  in 
volume.  It  will  be  admitted  that  even  this,  the  least  of 
our  estimates,  is  sufficiently  stupendous  to  justify  the  title 
of  the  present  paper. 

The  only  circumstance  which  could  excite  doubt  as  to 
the  justice  of  the  inference  that  Sirius  is  a  giant  sun, 
would  be  the  possibility  that  the  star  is  not  composed  of 
the  same  materials — the  same  elements — as  our  sun. 
\\7ere  no  evidence  obtainable  on  this  point,  it  might  be 
questioned  whether  Sirius  is  not  a  brilliant  light  rather 
than  a  glowing  body.  Unphilosophical  as  the  idea  of 
light  without  a  body  in  which  the  light  is  manifested  may 
appear  at  the  present  day,  yet  not  very  many  years  ago  it 
would  have  been  held  that  the  idea  is  admissible. 
Indeed  Dr  Whewell  in  his  "Plurality  of  Worlds" 


172  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

definitely  lays  down  the  proposition  that  the  size  and 
mass  of  a  star  cannot  safely  be  inferred  from  the  quantity 
of  light  it  emits.  Now,  however,  apart  from  the  known 
fact  that  light  cannot  exist  or  be  sustained  without  the 
motion  of  material  particles  (so  that  the  continuance  of 
a  mighty  light  implies  the  existence  of  a  vast  mass)  we 
have  distinct  evidence  respecting  the  constitution  of  many 
stars,  Sirius  being  among  the  number.  The  spectrum  of 
Sirius  (that  rainbow-tinted  streak  into  which  its  light  is 
spread  out,  so  to  speak,  by  means  of  the  spectroscope) 
resembles  that  of  our  own  sun  in  all  essential  respects,  a 
circumstance  showing  that  Sirius,  like  our  sun,  is  a  glow- 
ing mass,  whose  light  before  reaching  us  has  passed 
through  the  vapours  of  many  elements.  Dr  Huggins,  our 
chief  authority  in  such  matters,  speaks  thus  respecting 
Sirius : — "  The  spectrum  of  this  brilliant  white  star  is  very 
intense ;  but  owing  to  the  star's  low  altitude,  even  when 
most  favourably  situated,  the  observation  of  the  finer  lines 
is  rendered  very  difficult  by  the  movements  of  the  earth's 
atmosphere."  Three  if  not  four  known  elements  can  be 
recognised  as  existing  in  the  atmosphere  of  Sirius,  viz., 
hydrogen,  iron,  magnesium,  and  sodium.  But  doubtless 
many  others  could  be  identified  but  for  the  unfavourable 
circumstances  mentioned  by  Dr  Huggins,  for  he  adds  that 
"  the  whole  spectrum  is  crossed  by  a  very  large  number  of 
faint  and  fine  lines."  . 

The  study  of  Sirius  by  means  of  the  spectroscope  has 
led  to  a  very  remarkable  discovery  respecting  the  motion 
of  this  mighty  orb.  It  had  been  already  known  that  Sirius 


A  Giant  Sun.  1 73 

is  in  rapid  motion  through  space ;  simply  because  astro- 
nomers could  see  that  year  by  year  the  star  is  chang- 
ing its  position  on  the  celestial  sphere.  I  have  spoken 
above  of  the  minute  change  of  place  noted  in  the  course  of 
each  year  as  the  earth  circuits  round  the  sun ;  but  the 
reader  is  not  to  infer  that  the  star  does  not  shew  any 
signs  of  a  real  motion  of  its  own.  The  astronomer,  in 
looking  for  the  small  change  of  place  repeated  each  year, 
does  not  allow  his  observations  to  be  vitiated  by  a  change 
(sometimes  comparatively  large)  which  continues  progres- 
sively year  after  year.  He  makes  a  proper  correction  for 
the  progressive  change  so  as  to  be  able  to  determine 
satisfactorily  the  amount  of  the  recurrent  change.  In  the 
case  of  Sirius,  while  the  recurrent  change  is  scarcely  per- 
ceptible, even  with  the  most  delicate  instruments,  the 
progressive  change  is  not  only  considerable  enough  to 
be  detectible  by  its  effects  in  a  year,  but  as  it  accumu- 
lates year  after  year,  the  astronomer  need  only  compare 
observations  made  at  considerable  intervals  (as  ten,  fifty, 
or  a  hundred  years)  to  ascertain  the  rate  of  apparent  motion 
with  any  desired  degree  of  accuracy.  It  chances,  indeed, 
that  the  accounts  left  by  ancient  astronomers,  rough  though 
those  accounts  were,  sufficed  in  the  very  infancy  of 
modern  exact  astronomy  to  shew  that  Sirius  is  in  motion ; 
for  Halley  announced  so  far  back  as  ]  718  that  Sirius  must 
be  held  to  be  moving  slowly  southwards  on  the  heavens, 
if  the  observations  of  the  Alexandrian  astronomers  are  to 
be  accepted.  The  rate  of  this  motion  has  since  been 
determined  with  extreme  exactness.  It  is  such  that  in  the 


1 74  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

couise  of  about  1,433  years  Sirius  traverses  a  space  equal 
to  the  apparent  diameter  of  the  moon,  moving  southwards 
and  westwards  on  the  heavens,  the  southwardly  exceeding 
the  westwardly  motion  in  the  proportion  of  about  five  to 
two.  Now,  since  we  know  something  about  the  star's 
distance,  this  result  enables  us  to  infer  something  as  to 
the  star's  real  rate  of  motion.  The  displacement  is  a 
reality,  the  star  must  be  moving  athwart  the  line  of  sight 
— either  directly  or  on  a  slant  course.  The  smallest 
velocity  capable  of  explaining  the  displacement  is  that 
estimated  on  the  supposition  that  the  star  is  moving 
squarely  across  the  line  of  sight.  Now,  it  can  easily  be 
calculated  that  if  this  is  the  case,  and  the  distance  of  the 
star  equal  to  the  greatest  of  the  values  mentioned  above, 
then  the  star  must  be  moving  athwart  the  line  of  sight  at 
the  rate  of  nearly  twenty-six  miles  in  every  second  of  time. 
On  the  other  hand,  supposing  the  true  distance  of  the  star 
to  correspond  to  the  later  and  smaller  estimate  above 
mentioned,  the  rate  of  motion  is  about  fifteen  miles  in 
every  second  of  time.  Taking  the  mean  value  of  the 
distance,  we  infer  for  the  rate  of  motion  athwart  the  line 
of  sight,  a  velocity  of  no  less  than  twenty  miles  per 
second.  * 


*  Should  any  astronomical  reader  compare  this  paragraph  with  Dr. 
Huggins'  remarks  on  the  same  subject  in  the  Philosophical  Transactions 
for  1868  (p.  550),  he  will  recognise  some  considerable  discrepancies. 
These  arise  from  the  circumstance  that  Dr.  Huggins  (who  treats  of  this 
matter  only  in  passing)  has  by  inadvertence  taken  the  westwardly 
motion  of  Sirius  at  a  fifteenth  of  its  true  value.  This  causes  the  value 
twenty-four  miles  per  second  to  result  where  the  above  paragraph 


A  Giant  Sun.  175 

So  far  all  is  simple  enough.  Direct  observations  of  the 
plainest  nature,  applied  on  the  most  obvious  principles, 
have  told  us  all  we  require  to  know  as  to  the  displacement 
of  Sirius  on  the  heavens.  But  I  have  said  that  the 
spectroscope  has  given  information  respecting  the  motion 
of  Sirius ;  and  the  account  of  this  portion  of  the  work 
relates  to  one  of  the  most  remarkable  achievements  of 
modern  science. 

We  have  seen  that  the  actual  displacement  of  Sirius  on 
the  heavens  supplies  no  information  whatever  as  to  the 
direction  in  which  he  is  crossing  the  line  of  sight.  He 
may  be  moving  directly  or  squarely  across  that  line  with 
the  velocity  above  determined ;  but  he  may,  on  the  con- 
trary, be  moving  on  a  line  greatly  slanted  with  respect  to 
the  line  of  sight,  and  his  real  velocity  may  therefore  be 
very  much  greater.  In  the  latter  case  all  that  part  of  his 
velocity  which  tends  to  carry  him  either  towards  or  from 
us  must  escape  recognition  by  ordinary  means.  The  case 
may  be  compared  to  that  of  a  train  bearing  a  light  in  the 
night-time.  An  observer  of  such  a  train  can  readily 
detect  any  motion  which  causes  the  light  to  be  seen  in  a 
changing  direction ;  but  that  part  of  the  motion  which 
brings  the  light  nearer  to  him  or  removes  it  farther  from 
him  he  cannot  detect,  except  in  so  far  as  it  causes  the 

mentions  twenty- six  miles  per  second.  Then  this  velocity  is  increased 
to  forty  miles  per  second  instead  of  being  reduced  to  13'3  miles  per 
second,  to  correspond  to  the  later  or  reduced  estimate  of  the  distance 
of  Sirius.  I  mention  these  points,  not  to  call  attention  to  slips  such  as 
will  continually  occur  in  stating  relations  of  the  sort,  but  to  prevent 
the  reader  from  being  in  doubt  as  to  where  the  truth  lies. 


i  76  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

light  to  appear  larger  or  smaller  than  at  first.  Now  no 
conceivable  velocity  of  approach  or  recess  in  the  case  of 
Sirius  would  cause  the  star  to  appear  appreciably  brighter 
or  fainter  even  in  the  course  of  hundreds  of  years.  If  we 
set  the  star's  distance  at  a  hundred  millions  of  millions  of 
miles,  what  effect  can  an  approach  or  recession  through 
even  many  hundreds  of  millions  of  miles  produce  on  the 
star's  apparent  brightness  ?  Nay,  we  can  readily  infer 
from  the  seeming  displacement  of  the  star  how  utterly 
ineffective  any  corresponding  motion  of  approach  or  recess 
would  be  in  affecting  the  star's  light.  We  have  seen  that 
in  1,433  years  the  star  shifts  on  the  heavens  by  a  space 
equal  to  the  moon's  apparent  diameter.  Now  it  follows 
from  this  that  if  the  motion  of  recess  or  approach  be  as 
great  as  what  may  be  termed  the  thwart  motion,  the  dis- 
tance of  the  star  would  change  in  1,433  years  in  the  pro- 
portion in  which  the  distance  of  the  farthest  point  of  the 
moon's  globe  exceeds  that  of  the  nearest  point,  or  about  as 
60  exceeds  59  ;  the  corresponding  change  of  lustre,  there- 
fore, in  that  long  interval  of  forty-three  generations  would 
be  smaller  than  the  most  skilful  astronomer  could  estimate, 
even  though  the  change  occurred  within  an  hour — so 
that  he  could  test  the  different  degrees  of  lustre  with 
one  and  the  same  telescope,  and  under  like  conditions  of 
atmosphere,  eyesight,  and  so  on. 

It  is  this  apparently  intractable  problem,  however — the 
problem  of  measuring  the  rate  at  which  a  star  is  approach- 
ing or  receding — which  the  spectroscope  has  enabled  men 
to  solve.  The  actual  principles  on  which  the  method  of 


A  Giant  Sun.  1 7  7 

observation  depends  need  not  here  be  explained,  because 
they  have  already  been  considered  at  some  length  in  a 
paper  entitled  the  "Gamut  of  Light,"  in  my  treatise, 
"  Orbs  around  us."  But  I  may  so  far  recapitulate  what 
I  have  there  said,  as  to  note  that  if  we  are  approaching 
Sirius  or  receding  from  him,  either  through  his  motion 
or  the  sun's,  or  through  the  combined  effects  of  both 
motions,  the  waves  of  light  which  travel  to  us  from  Sirius 
must  appear  shortened  or  lengthened,  precisely  as  sea- 
waves  would  seem  narrower  or  broader  according  as  a 
swimmer  travelled  against  or  with  their  onward  course. 
Now  the  light  from  a  star  contains  all  degrees  of  wave- 
length from  the  longest  light-waves  (which  correspond  to 
the  red  end  of  the  spectrum)  down  to  the  shortest  (which 
correspond  to  the  violet  end) ;  so  that  amidst  all  these 
wave-lengths  the  observer  could  no  more  recognise  such  a 
change  as  would  result  from  approach  or  recess  than  the 
swimmer  of  our  illustrative  case  could  recognise  the 
apparent  shortening  or  lengthening  of  waves  in  a  storm- 
tost  sea  where  waves  of  all  dimensions  were  abroad.  But 
if  light- waves  of  any  specified  length  can  be  in  any  way 
distinguished  from  the  rest,  the  case  (as  respects  them) 
corresponds  to  that  of  a  swimmer  crossing  a  long  and 
uniform  succession  of  rollers.  Now  the  dark  lines  in  the 
spectrum  of  a  star,  when  they  can  be  certainly  identified 
with  the  lines  belonging  to  the  spectrum  of  some  known 
element,  supply  this  very  knowledge  of  the  true  wave- 
lengths. Dr  Huggins  had  identified  certain  very  well 
marked  lines  in  the  spectrum  of  Sirius  with  the  well- 


1 78  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

known  lines  of  hydrogen.  If  he  could  find  that  these 
lines  in  the  star's  spectrum  are  measurably  displaced 
either  towards  the  red  or  the  violet  end  of  the  spectrum, 
he  could  infer  that  the  wave-lengths  of  the  star's  light  are 
measurably  lengthened  or  shortened  through  a  recession 
or  approach  on  the  part  of  the  star.  This  he  actually 
effected.  He  found  that  one  of  the  hydrogen  lines  of  the 
star  was  displaced  in  such  a  way  as  to  indicate  a  lengthen- 
ing of  the  light-waves  corresponding  to  a  recession  at  the 
rate  of  forty-one  miles  per  second.  But  a  part  of  this 
recession  was  due  to  the  earth's  orbital  motion  at  the  time 
of  observation,  and  another  part  is  due  to  the  sun's  own 
motion  through  space.  There  remains,  after  these  portions 
have  been  deducted,  a  motion  of  recession  in  space 
amounting  to  about  twenty-six  miles  per  second.  This 
rate  of  motion — or  rather  a  recession  from  the  sun  at  the 
rate  of  twenty-nine  miles  per  second — is  absolute,  not 
being  affected  in  any  way  by  our  estimate  of  the  distance 
of  Sirius.  Combining  the  recession  in  space  with  the 
estimated  thwart  motion  of  twenty  miles  per  second,  we 
deduce  a  real  motion  in  space  amounting  to  about  thirty- 
three  miles  per  second.* 

But  the  circumstance  which  remains  to  be  mentioned 
respecting  Sirius  before  this  paper  is  drawn  to  a  conclusion, 
is  perhaps  more  remarkable  than  any  yet  referred  to. 


*  Of  course  the  two  motions  must  not  be  simply  added  together,  since 
they  are  not  in  the  same  direction.  The  actual  motion  is  represented 
by  the  diagonal  of  an  oblong  whose  sides  represent  the  motion  of  reces- 
sion and  the  thwart  motion. 


A  Giant  Sun.  1 79 

When  astronomers  compared  together  the  places  of 
Sirius  as  recorded  in  a  long  series  of  observations,  they 
found  what  appeared  like  a  periodic  displacement  of  the 
star.  In  the  first  instance,  they  had  examined  only  the 
recorded  positions  of  the  star  as  respects  east  and  west ; 
and  the  observed  displacement  in  this  direction  suggested 
that  in  reality  Sirius  is  circling  around  another  orb,  or 
rather  that  Sirius  and  some  other  orb  are  circling  around 
a  common  centre,  in  a  period  of  fifty  years.  When  it  was 
found  that  the  star  appears  to  drift  to  north  and  south  of 
its  mean  place  in  a  manner  according  very  closely  with 
this  hypothesis,  astronomers  naturally  began  to  regard  the 
theory  as  rendered  highly  probable  by  a  coincidence  which 
could  scarcely  be  regarded  as  accidental. 

But  no  star  had  been  seen  where  this  theory  required 
that  a  star  should  be  ;  and  moreover  the  theory  required 
an  orb  whose  bulk  should  be  about  two-thirds  of  the 
enormous  bulk  of  Sirius,  and  it  was  to  be  inferred  that  so 
large  an  orb  would  shine  with  a  lustre  comparable  with 
that  of  Sirius  himself.  On  this  last  point,  however,  it  was 
well  remarked  that  we  have  no  sufficient  reason  for  believ- 
ing that  all  the  orbs  which  people  space  are  luminous. 
However,  a  search  was  instituted  for  the  star  which  the 
theory  seemed  to  require.  Nor  was  the  search  unsuccess- 
ful. With  a  telescope  18|  inches  in  aperture,  made  by 
himself,  the  eminent  American  optician,  Alvan  Clark, 
detected  a  faint  star  close  by  Sirius,  apparently,  though 
actually  (on  a  moderate  computation),  at  least  2,000  millions 
of  miles  from  him.  The  movements  of  this  star  have  been 


1 80  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

held  by  some  astronomers  to  accord  fairly  with  the 
requirements  of  the  theory  just  mentioned ;  though  I  must 
admit  that  I  fail  to  find  a  very  close  resemblance  between 
the  actual  motion  of  the  faint  companion  and  those  which 
the  theory  requires.  But  we  now  have  a  choice  of  disturb- 
ing companions,  since  the  late  Mr  Goldsmidt  (who  far 
surpassed  even  our  own  "  eagle-eyed  Dawes  "  in  keenness 
of  vision)  not  only  saw  Clark's  star  with  a  telescope  only 
four  inches  in  aperture,  but  actually  succeeded  in  detect- 
ing five  other  companion  stars. 

We  can  best  explain  the  faintness  of  these  stars  by 
supposing  that  they  are  opaque  bodies  which  shine  only 
by  reflecting  the  light  which  they  receive  from  their  sun 
Sirius.  But  if  so,  they  must  be  globes  of  enormous  real 
dimensions,  the  least  of  them  probably  exceeding  our  own 
sun  many  times  in  volume,  while  the  greatest  (so  we  may 
conclude  from  the  disturbance  Sirius  himself  undergoes) 
must  be  so  large  and  massive  that  a  thousand  such  orbs 
as  our  sun  would  not  equal  it  either  in  bulk  or  mass.  We 
have  here,  then,  a  system  differing  altogether  in  character 
from  our  solar  system,  the  largest  member  of  which  is  but 
equal  in  mass  to  about  the  1,300th  part  of  the  sun.  The 
complete  Strian  system,  may  even  outweigh  Sirius  himself, 
and  its  mass  added  to  his  must  exert  an  attractive 
influence  throughout  an  enormous  portion  of  the  stellar 
system.  It  would  seem,  indeed,  not  wholly  impossible 
that  Sirius  holds  a  higher  rank  in  the  scale  of  creation 
that  our  sun  and  other  similar  orbs — that  compared  with 
liim  these  are  as  secondary  orbs  compared  with  primaries. 


A  Giant  Sun.  181 

Without  insisting  on  this,  however,  we  may  assert  with 
confidence  that  whether  we  consider  his  volume,  his  bulk, 
or  the  mighty  energy  evidenced  by  his  brightness,  Sirius  well 
merits  the  title  under  which  he  has  been  here  described. 
Of  all  the  orbs  with  which  astronomers  have  to  deal,  he 
seems  worthiest  to  be  called  par  excellence  the  giant  sun. 


THE  STAE-DEPTHS. 

THE  awe  with  which  the  thoughtful  student  of  astronomy 
in  our  day  contemplates  the  star-depths  can  scarcely 
exceed  the  simple  wonder  of  the  Chaldsean  herdsman,  who 
gazed  on  the  mysterious  vault  of  heaven  and  watched  the 
constellations  as  they  passed  with  stately  motion  along 
tlieir  nocturnal  arcs.  Brought  up  from  our  youth  to 
regard  the  fixed  stars  as  the  peers  of  our  own  sun,  and  the 
sun  as  an  orb  exceeding  more  than  a  million  times  in 
volume  this  earth  on  which  we  live,  the  grandeur  of  these 
conceptions  is  yet  in  part  marred  by  their  familiarity. 
The  ancient  astronomer,  even  though  he  might  believe, 
with  Aristarchus  of  Samos,  that  the  stars  are  golden  studs 
upon  the  crystal  dome  of  heaven,  and  the  sun  scarce  larger 
than  the  Peloponnesus,  must  yet  have  been  penetrated 
with  a  profound  sense  of  the  mystery  surrounding  all  he 
saw.  We  have  learned  so  much,  that  we  are  apt  to  feel 
as  though  all  knowledge  were  within  our  grasp.  The  orbs 
of  heaven  have  been  weighed  and  analyzed,  they  have 
been  tracked  on  orbital  paths  around  each  other,  they 
have  been  counted  and  gauged  and  charted,  until  it  would 
seem  as  though  their  domain  had  been  completely  ex- 


The  Star-Depths.  183 

plored  and  mastered.  It  was  not  so  with  the  ancients. 
They  might  guess  and  theorize,  but  they  knew  scarce 
anything  of  the  stars.  And  out  of  their  want  of  know- 
ledge sprang  a  sense  of  awe,  which  probably  surpassed  in 
intensity  the  feeling  with  which  even  the  most  thoughtful 
astronomers  of  our  own  day  regard  the  orbs  tenanting  the 
depths  of  heaven. 

It  is  my  purpose  in  the  present  paper  to  attempt  to  restore 
to  the  sidereal  system  something  of  that  mystery  which 
pervaded  it  of  old.  I  wish  to  shew  that  some,  at  least,  of 
those  views  which  had  seemed  most  thoroughly  established, 
have  but  a  slight  foundation,  if  any,  on  which  to  rest ;  and 
that  so  far  from  having  penetrated  the  secret  of  the 
star-depths,  we  stand  as  yet  but  on  the  threshold  of  that 
mighty  domain  which  belongs  to  the  astronomy  of  the 
future. 

Since  the  establishment  of  the  Copernican  theory,  the 
extension  of  the  sidereal  system  as  recognized  by  astrono- 
mers, has  been  progressively  increasing.  I  do  not  refer 
here  merely  to  the  increase  of  telescopic  power,  and  the 
corresponding  increase  of  the  range  of  astronomical  vision. 
That  increase  of  range  could  only  tell  us  what  might  readily 
have  been  guessed  without  it — namely,  that  the  vast 
spaces  which  lie  beyond  the  range  of  any  given  telescopic 
power  are  not  untenanted  by  stars.  But  the  feature  to 
which  I  would  especially  invite  attention  is  the  increase 
of  the  estimated  scale  on  which  the  sidereal  system  is 
built, — the  increase  in  our  estimate  of  the  size  and  bright- 
ness of  individual  orbs,  and  the  yet  more  surprising 


1 84  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

increase  in  our  estimate  of  the  distances  which  separate 
orb  from  orb. 

The  first  step  in  this  progress  was  the  most  remarkable 
of  all  It  was  very  justly  urged  by  Tycho  Brahe",  that,  if 
the  Copernican  theory  were  true,  the  stars  must  be  regard- 
ed as  immensely  more  distant  than  astronomers  had  ever 
ventured  to  imagine.  Tycho  Brahe  did  not,  indeed,  know 
how  far  the  Earth  actually  is  from  the  Sun ;  but  he  knew 
that  the  extent  of  her  orbit  or  of  the  Sun's  orbit,  according 
as  the  Sun  or  the  Earth  is  fixed,  must  be  measured  by 
millions  of  miles.  "Is  it  credible,"  he  asked,  "that 
although  moving  in  an  orbit  so  enormous  in  extent,  the 
Earth  as  seen  from  the  nearest  star  would  seem  absolutely 
unchanged  in  position  ? "  Yet  this  must  be  the  case  if  the 
Copernican  theory  be  true.  For  not  one  of  the  stars  seems 
to  move,  as  the  Earth  completes  the  circuit  spoken  of  by 
Copernicus  ;  and  if  no  star  moves  as  seen  from  the  Earth, 
the  Earth  must  appear  at  rest  as  seen  from  each  star  in 
the  heavens-.  Each  star  must  therefore  lie  at  so  enormous 
a  distance,  that  the  wide  extent  of  the  Earth's  orbit  is  re- 
duced to  a  mere  point.  "Such  a  conception,"  Tycho 
reasoned,  "  seems  wholly  inadmissible ;  and  therefore  the 
Copernican  theory  must  be  erroneous." 

This  reasoning  was  valid,  although  the  conclusion  was 
incorrect.  We  must  not  class  the  objections  urged  by 
Tycho  Brahe  against  the  Copernican  system,  with  those 
unmeaning  arguments  by  means  of  which  the  Ptolemaists 
had  long  defended  their  position.  Undoubtedly  the  con- 
clusion that  the  stars  are  suns  comparable  in  splendour 


The  Star- Depths.  185 

with  our  own,  was  not  one  to  be  lightly  accepted.  And 
yet  no  other  conclusion  could  be  adopted,  if  the  motion  of 
the  Earth  around  the  Sun  were  once  admitted.  We  have 
just  seen  that  the  Earth's  orbit,  viewed  from  each  of  the 
fixed  stars,  would  be  reduced  to  a  mere  point.  The  Sun, 
then,  which  lies  within  that  orbit,  and  whose  relative 
dimensions  were  perfectly  well  known  even  in  Tycho's 
time,  would  a  fortiori  be  but  a  point  as  seen  from  even 
the  nearest  of  the  stars.  If  he  were  visible  at  all,  it  would 
merely  be  on  account  of  the  enormous  intrinsic  brilliancy 
of  his  light.  But  the  stars  are  points  of  light,  and  the 
intrinsic  brilliancy  of  their  light  also  must  be  enormous, 
in  order  that  they  may  be  barely  visible.  Their  seeming 
minuteness  is  at  once  seen  to  be  no  proof  of  real  minute- 
ness, when  the  fact  is  recognized  that  the  Sun  would 
appear  at  least  as  minute  if  viewed  from  the  neighbour- 
hood of  a  fixed  star. 

The  mistake  of  Tycho  Brane*  consisted  in  his  failing  to 
consider  that  the  whole  question  was  one  of  evidence.  If 
Copernicus  and  his  followers  could  prove  their  case,  any 
conclusions  legitimately  deducible  were  to  be  accepted, 
without  any  reference  to  the  startling  character  of  the 
views  they  might  point  to.  When  Tycho  began  to  see  the 
heavens  opening  out  before  him,  and  all  the  stars  taking 
rank  as  suns,  the  blaze  of  splendour  was  too  fierce — his 
mental  vision  was  unprepared  to  contemplate  so  glorious  a 
display,  and  he  would  fain  have  dropped  a  veil  over  that 
unbearable  effulgence. 

But  the  men  who  followed  him   were  more  daring. 


1 86  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

Boldly  grasping  the  weapons  which  Tycho  Brahe*  had 
collected  for  an  attack  upon  the  Copernican  theory,  they 
turned  those  weapons  against  the  Ptolemaists.  Seizing 
the  only  available  vantage-ground — that  one  peculiarity 
of  the  Solar  System,  without  which  the  theories  of  Newton 
himself  would  never,  in  all  probability,  have  had  existence 
— the  great  astronomer  Kepler  found  in  the  seemingly 
capricious  motions  of  the  planet  Mars  the  means  of 
abolishing  at  once  and  for  ever  the  '  cycles  and  epicycles," 
the  *  Gentries  and  eccentrics,'  in  which  astronomers  had  so 
long  put  faith.  Then  Newton  pushed  the  attack  yet 
farther,  setting  forth  the  real  significance  of  those  laws 
which,  in  Kepler's  hands,  had  seemed  empirical.  And 
lastly,  one  proof  followed  after  another,  until  the  new 
theories  had  become  so  firmly  established  that  no  one  who 
comprehends  their  position  has  since  ventured  to  attack 
them. 

But  in  the  meantime,  while  the  confirmation  of  the 
Copernican  theory  was  demonstrating  as  real  those 
wonders  at  which  Tycho  Brahe  had  stood  appalled,  fresh 
light  was  thrown  on  the  real  dimensions  of  the  universe 
of  stars.  For  it  was  found,  as  research  after  research  was 
directed  to  the  point,  that  the  Sun's  distance  had  been 
hugely  underrated,  and  that  therefore  even  Tycho's 
estimate  of  the  stars'  distances  and  dimensions,  according 
to  the  Copernican  theory,  fell  far  short  of  the  truth. 
More  and  more  scrutinizingly  astronomers  searched  the 
evidence  bearing  on  the  subject  of  the  Sun's  distance ; 
wider  and  wider  grew  the  limits  beyond  which  they  proved 


The  Star-Depths.  187 

that  that  distance  must  lie ;  but  as  yet  they  could  find  no  sign 
how  far  those  limits  were  exceeded.  From  a  few  millions 
of  miles  the  estimated  distance  had  grown  to  tens  of 
millions — forty,  fifty,  eighty  millions.  At  length  the  limit 
was  nearly  reached,  and  for  the  first  time  in  the  history 
of  science  men  were  able  to  say,  not,  as  hitherto,  that  the 
Sun's  distance  certainly  exceeds  such  and  such  a  number  of 
miles,  but  that  it  approaches,  more  or  less  closely,  to  such 
and  such  a  value. 

The  first  rough  estimate  set  the  Sun's  distance  between 
eighty  and  one  hundred  millions  of  miles.  Gradually 
obtaining  better  and  better  means  of  measuring  the  vast 
gulf  which  separates  us  from  our  ruling  luminary,  astro- 
nomers have  found  91,500,000  to  represent,  with  sufficient 
accuracy,  that  enormous  distance.  Precisely  as  the 
estimate  of  the  Sun's  distance  in  Tycho  Brahms  day  had 
thus  been  enlarged,  so  had  his  estimate  of  the  distances 
which  separate  the  stars  from  us  been  overpassed, 
enormous  and  even  inconceivable  as  he  had  deemed  them. 

It  is  this  great  fact,  then,  that  I  take  as  chief  guide  in 
passing  beyond  the  limits  of  the  Solar  System  to  survey  the 
star-depths  ;  the  fact,  namely,  that  seen  from  the  nearest 
fixed  star  the  Earth's  orbit,  though  more  than  180  millions 
of  miles  in  diameter,  is  reduced  to  dimensions  absolutely 
inappreciable  by  all  ordinary  modes  of  measurement. 
Let  the  reader  turn,  on  any  clear  night,  to  the  constellation 
of  the  Great  Bear,  and  let  him  regard  the  middle  star  of 
the  Bear's  curved  tail — the  middle  horse  of  those  three 
which  are  supposed  to  draw  the  celestial  Plough.  Close 


1 88  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

by  that  orb  he  will  see  a  faint  orb,  which  was  known  in 
old  times  as  "  Jack  by  the  middle  horse."  It  would  be  a 
fact  altogether  amazing  in  its  significance,  if  the  wide 
sweep  of  the  Earth's  path  round  the  Sun  were,  at  the 
distance  of  the  nearest  star,  reduced  to  a  circle  of  diameter 
seemingly  no  greater  than  the  distance  separating  these 
two  orbs,  which  appear  to  lie  so  close  together  on  the 
celestial  sphere.  But  that  tiny  distance  exceeds  five 
hundred  times  the  apparent  diameter  of  the  Earth's  path, 
as  it  would  appear  if  it  could  be  viewed  from  the  nearest 
star,  Alpha  of  the  Centaur. 

Even  the  mighty  instruments  of  our  own  day,  wielded 
with  all  the  skill  and  acumen  which  a  long  experience  has 
generated,  have  not  sufficed  to  enable  us  to  measure  the 
distances  of  more  than  about  a  dozen  stars.  Nor  probably 
will  it  ever  be  possible  for  man  to  count  by  the  hundred 
the  number  of  stars  whose  distances  are  known.  Of  all 
the  millions  of  stars  revealed  by  the  telescope,  not  the 
ten-thousandth  part  will  have  their  true  position  in  space 
assigned  to  them,  however  roughly.  The  real  architecture 
of  the  stellar  system  must  remain  for  ever  unknown  to  us, 
except  as  respects  a  relatively  minute  portion,  lying  within 
certain  limits  of  distance  from  the  Earth. 

But  while  the  direct  measurement  of  the  star-depths  is 
thus  out  of  our  power,  we  are  able,  by  carefully  studying 
the  scene  presented  to  us,  to  learn  much  respecting  the 
way  in  which  the  sidereal  system  is  constructed,  and  also 
respecting  the  nature  of  the  bodies  which  compose  that 
system. 


The  Star- Depths.  189 

In  the  first  place,  we  have,  in  the  movements  of  the 
stars,  a  means  of  estimating  certain  general  relations  ;  and 
in  particular,  of  determining  whether,  as  had  been  supposed, 
the  apparent  brightness  of  the  stars  is  likely  to  afford  a 
good  general  test  of  their  distance. 

It  will  be  clear  that  if  two  stars  are  travelling  along  in 
the  same  direction  and  at  the  same  rate,  we  could  at  once 
estimate  their  relative  distance  by  comparing  the  amount 
of  their  seeming  motions.  If  one  was  twice  as  far  from  us 
as  the  other,  it  is  obvious  that  the  more  distant  orb  would 
seem  to  move  but  half  as  quickly  as  the  nearer.  To  take 
a  simple  illustrative  instance — the  nearer  of  two  men 
walking  at  equal  rates  in  the  same  direction,  but  one  twice 
as  far  from  the  observer  as  the  other,  would  not  merely  be 
reduced  in  seeming  height  to  one  half  the  seeming  height 
of  the  other,  but  his  steps  being  correspondingly  reduced 
in  seeming  extent,  he  would  appear  to  move  but  one  half 
as  fast. 

Of  course  the  actual  motions  of  the  so-called  fixed  stars 
are  not  of  such  a  nature  as  to  afford  precise  information  as 
to  the  star  distances.  The  stars  are  moving  in  all  con- 
ceivable directions,  and  at  very  different  rates.  In  the 
case  of  any  given  star,  the  seeming  motion  can  tell  us  little 
respecting  either  the  real  motion  or  the  star's  distance. 
Eut  the  average  seeming  motions  of  a  set  of  stars  may 
give  us  more  trustworthy  information  ;  because  in  taking 
an  average  we  get  rid,  to  a  great  extent,  of  the  effects  of 
errors  affecting  individual  cases.  For  example,  if  we  class 
together  all  the  stars  of  the  sixth  magnitude — the  faintest, 


1 90  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

that  is,  which  the  unaided  eye  can  see — and,  adding  all 
their  seeming  motions  together,  divide  the  resulting  sum- 
total  among  all  the  stars  of  this  order,  we  may  regard  the 
resulting  mean  motion  as  very  fairly  representing  the  true 
mean  for  the  sixth  magnitude  stars.  I  say  nothing,  here, 
of  the  special  rules  according  to  which  this  summing  up 
and  distribution  should  be  effected — let  us  suppose  both 
operations  effected  with  strict  attention  to  mathematical 
considerations.  Then  we  have  the  average  seeming  motion 
of  the  order  of  stars  we  are  dealing  with,  and  we  can 
compare  its  amount  with  that  belonging  to  other  orders. 

Clearly  we  should  expect  that  if,  on  the  whole,  bright- 
ness affords  satisfactory  evidence  as  to  distance,  the  average 
seeming  movements  of  faint  stars  should  bear  a  certain 
and  a  small  proportion  to  the  average  seeming  movements 
of  bright  stars.  But  the  very  first  result  of  such  a  process 
of  distribution  as  I  have  spoken  of,  is  to  shew  that  no  such 
proportion  holds.  On  the  contrary,  the  average  seeming 
motions  of  the  fainter  stars  are  about  as  large  as  the  average 
seeming  motions  of  the  stars  belonging  to  the  leading  orders 
of  magnitude.  To  make  the  comparison  more  complete, 
I  have  taken  the  stars  of  the  first,  second,  and  third 
magnitude  to  form  one  set,  and  those  of  the  fourth,  fifth, 
and  sixth,  to  form  a  second ;  then,  on  comparing  the  average 
seeming  movements  for  the  two  sets,  I  have,  to  my  surprise, 
found  these  movements  strictly  equal. 

It  is  easy  to  see  why  this  result  may  fairly  be  regarded 
as  surprising.  For  let  us  consider  its  real  significance. 
We  have  seen  that  the  seeming  rate  of  a  star's  motion 


The  Star-Depths.  191 

affords  evidence  as  to  the  star's  distance,  and  evidence 
which  may  at  least  as  safely  be  trusted  as  that  afforded  by 
seeming  brightness.  Judging  then  from  the  result  just 
arrived  at,  we  should  infer  that  the  stars  of  the  three  lead- 
ing orders  of  magnitude  are,  on  the  average,  no  nearer  to 
us  than  the  stars  of  the  next  three  orders.  This  would  be 
to  trust  solely  to  the  evidence  derived  from  the  stellar 
motions.  We  cannot,  however,  altogether  neglect  the 
evidence  derived  from  brightness.  We  must  believe  that 
the  brighter  stars  are,  on  the  whole,  somewhat  nearer  to  us 
than  the  fainter  ones.  If  we  would  combine  the  two  forms 
of  evidence,  we  must  infer,  I  conceive,  that  among  the  orbs 
which  surround  us  on  all  sides,  there  are  some  which  are 
distinguished  among  the  rest  by  their  superior  size  and 
brightness.  These  must  be  few  in  number,  compared  with 
all  the  stars  that  the  unaided  eye  can  see.  The  inferior 
orbs  must  be  spread  more  richly  throughout  surrounding 
space  ;  and  hence  some  among  them  must  lie  nearer  to  the 
Sun  than  any  of  those  larger  orbs  which  are  his  real  peers. 
The  larger  apparent  motion  of  these  nearer  stars,  suffices, 
when  averages  are  taken,  to  make  up  for  the  circumstance 
that  distance  must  inevitably  affect  the  average  apparent 
rate  of  motion,  as  well  as  the  average  brightness.  That 
this  interpretation  is  just,  is  confirmed  by  the  circumstance 
that  it  is  among  the  fainter  stars  that  the  most  remarkable 
motions  are  observed. 

The  important  conclusion  to  which  we  are  forced,  as  I 
judge,  is  that  we  must  divide  the  stars  into  two  chief  classes 
— leading  orbs  like  our  own  sun,  and  minor  orbs  more 


1 92  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

profusely  spread  throughout  space.  On  only  one  point  is 
there  any  doubt.  There  must  be  a  great  range  of  stellar 
magnitudes,  a  much  wider  range  than  has  been  usually 
supposed.  But  it  is  not  quite  clear  whether  our  sun  belongs 
to  the  class  of  smaller,  or  to  that  of  larger  orbs.  I  have 
spoken  hitherto  as  though  he  were  certainly  one  of  the 
leading  stars,  and  this  is  the  view  usually  accepted.  But 
there  are  reasons  for  believing  that  our  sun  may  be  a  small 
star  by  comparison  with  the  greater  number  of  those  which 
exist  in  his  neighbourhood.  For  if  we  consider  the  small 
number  of  stars  whose  probable  dimensions  are  known, 
we  find  reason  for  believing  that,  whereas  the  least  of  these 
orbs  is  fully  one-fifth  of  our  sun,  the  largest  exceeds  our 
sun  two  or  three  thousand  times  in  magnitude.  And  to 
this  must  be  added  the  circumstance,  that  many  stars, 
which  cannot  be  included  in  the  list  of  those  whose  dis- 
tances are  known,  have  yet  been  so  far  dealt  with  that  the 
astronomer  is  quite  sure  that  their  distances  are  greater 
than  any  of  the  measured  distances.  All  such  stars  are 
certainly  larger  than  we  should  judge  them  to  be  if  their 
distances  were  measurable.  This  we  know :  what  we  are 
ignorant  of  is,  Jiow  much  larger  they  may  be.  So  far  then 
as  can  be  judged,  our  sun  is  inferior,  both  in  magnitude 
and  in  brightness,  to  the  greater  number  of  the  orbs  which 
surround  him. 

But  to  return  to  what  I  have  spoken  of  as  proved — the 
existence,  namely,  of  a  very  wide  range  of  difference 
amongst  star-magnitudes  ;  let  us  inquire  whether  we  have 
evidence  of  even  greater  variety  in  the  constitution  of  the 
star-depths. 


The  Star- Depths.  193 

So  soon  as  we  have  passed  the  range  of  the  unaided 
eye,  we  have  lost  all  means,  or  even  hope,  of  measuring 
distances.  We  are  then  immersed  amid  really  fathomless 
depths,  and  all  we  can  hope  to  do  is  to  form  some  con- 
ception respecting  the  relative  dimensions  of  the  objects 
brought  into  our  view. 

There  is  indeed  a  theory  about  the  star-system,  which 
is  based  on  a  different  idea  respecting  the  difficulties 
which  the  astronomer  has  to  contend  with.  I  refer  to  the 
theory,  which  finds  a  place  in  all  our  text-books  of 
astronomy,  that  the  star-system  has  the  form  of  a  cloven 
flat  disc.  This  theory  was  formed  by  Sir  William 
Herschel,  when  he  was  as  yet  unaware  of  the  vastness 
and  complexity  of  the  star-system.  The  very  words  used 
in  describing  his  process  of  research,  indicate  that  the  great 
astronomer  was  full  of  confidence  in  the  power  of  his 
great  telescopes  to  fathom  all  the  profundities  of  the 
sidereal  system.  He  called  his  method  star-gauging,  he 
spoke  of  the  distance  at  which  the  boundary  of  the  star- 
system  lay  in  this  or  that  direction,  and  he  discussed 
the  numerical  results  he  had  obtained,  without  doubting 
that  those  results  really  enabled  him  to  determine  the 
architecture  of  the  galaxy. 

But  as  the  work  progressed  Sir  William  Herschel  grew 
less  confident.  He  began  to  recognize  signs  of  a  com- 
plexity of  structure  which  set  his  method  of  star-gauging 
at  defiance.  It  became  more  and  more  clear  to  him  also, 
as  he  extended  his  survey,  that  the  star-depths  were  in 
fact  unfathomable — not  only  by  his  gauging  telescope, 


1 94  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

(commonly  known  as  the  twenty-feet  reflector,)  but  even 
by  that  mighty  mirror  which  was  one  of  the  chief  wonders 
of  the  world,  until  the  great  Eosse  telescope  dwarfed  it 
into  relative  insignificance.  At  length  Sir  "William 
Herschel  definitively  abandoned  the  principles  on  which 
his  star- gauging  had  been  based ;  and  his  observations,  as 
well  as  his  theoretical  researches,  were  thenceforth  directed 
to  the  determination  of  the  general  laws  which  prevail 
amid  the  star-depths.  It  cannot  be  questioned  that,  with 
those  principles,  he  gave  up  also  the  theory  of  the  star- 
system  which  he  had  based  upon  them.  But,  singularly 
enough,  the  theory  remains,  and  seems  likely  to  remain, 
in  our  text-books  of  astronomy ;  while  the  far  more 
wonderful  views  to  which  the  later  labours  of  Sir 
William  Herschel  pointed,  have  been  almost  wholly 
neglected.* 

If  we  consider,  in  the  first  place,  the  views  of  Sir 
William  Herschel  respecting  the  Milky  Way,  we  shall 
find  that  the  variety  which  we  have  recognized  among  the 
isolated  stars,  is  altogether  slight  by  comparison  with  the 
amazing  variety  of  magnitude,  of  arrangement,  and 

*  Struve,  the  highest  authority  of  recent  times  on  the  subject  of  the 
stellar  system,  with  the  single  exception  of  Sir  John  Herschel, 
accounts  for  this  strange  circumstance  by  noting  that  Sir  William 
Herschel  nowhere  announces,  in  so  many  words,  that  the  cloven  disc 
theory  of  the  stellar  system  must  be  abandoned,  though  the  great 
astronomer  did  very  clearly  abandon  the  principles  which  had  led  to 
the  enunciation  of  that  theory.  It  may  be  added  that  the  theory  is 
very  simple,  and  very  easily  understood,  whereas  the  subsequent 
inquiries  and  views  of  Sir  William  Herschel  deal  with  very  complex 
relations. 


The  Star- Depths.  195 

probably  of  constitution,  to  be  recognized  among  the  orbs 
which  form  the  Galaxy.  It  is  only  necessary  to  under- 
stand rightly  the  change  which  took  place  in  Sir  William 
Herschel's  views,  to  see  that  this  conclusion  must  be 
accepted  by  those  who  regard  the  opinion  of  that  great 
astronomer  as  decisive  in  questions  relating  to  the 
stellar  system. 

Herschel's  earlier  labours  had  proceeded  on  the  hypothesis 
of  a  generally  uniform  distribution  of  the  stars ;  and 
according  to  this  hypothesis,  those  rich  regions  of  the 
Galaxy  in  which  stars  of  all  magnitudes  are  spread  with 
unspeakable  profusion,  had  implied  simply  an  enormous 
extension  of  the  stellar  system  in  the  direction  in  which 
these  glories  are  seen.  The  smaller  and  also  more  pro- 
fusely scattered  stars  were  not  to  be  regarded  as  in  reality 
smaller  and  in  reality  spread  more  richly  in  space,  but  as 
lying  farther  away  than  the  brighter,  and  occupying  a  more 
extensive  region. 

But  Herschel  abandoned  the  theory  of  a  generally 
uniform  distribution  of  stars.  In  fact,  instead  of  adopting 
any  general  d  priori  theory,  by  means  of  which  to  inter- 
pret the  aspect  of  the  star-groups,  he  changed  his  plan  of 
proceeding  altogether,  and  endeavoured,  by  means  of  a 
careful  study  of  the  laws  of  star-grouping,  to  arrive  at 
consistent  theories  respecting  the  real  distribution  of  the 
stars  throughout  space.  This  was  undoubtedly  the  safer 
course ;  and  we  might  be  disposed  to  wonder  that 
Herschel  had  not  adopted  it  in  the  first  instance,  were  it 
not  for  the  circumstance  that  the  theory  he  actually 


1 96  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

adopted  when  he  began  his  labours,  had  been  so  long 
regarded  an  unquestionably  sound  one.* 

When  Herschel  began  to  reason  from  observed  appear- 
ances, he  was  quickly  led  to  abandon  the  theory  of  a  uni- 
form distribution  of  the  stars.  He  saw  that  the  Milky 
Way,  for  instance,  is  by  no  means  to  be  regarded  as  a 
zone  of  stars  resembling,  in  their  arrangement,  those  which 
form  our  constellations.  '  The  stars  we  consider  as  insulated 
are  surrounded,'  he  says,  'by  a  magnificent  collection  of 
innumerable  stars,  called  the  Milky  Way.  For  though  our 
sun,  and  all  the  stars  we  see,  may  truly  be  said  to  be  in 
the  plane  of  the  Milky  Way,  yet  I  am  now  convinced,  by 
a  long  inspection,  and  continued  examination  of  it,  that 
the  Milky  Way  itself  consists  of  stars  very  differently 
scattered  from  those  which  are  immediately  about  us.'-f 

*  It  would  be  unfair,  however,  to  omit  mention  of  the  fact  that 
Michell  had  clearly  shewn,  a  quarter  of  a  century  before  Herschel 
began  his  labours,  that  the  theory  of  a  uniform  distribution  of  the 
stars  is  untenable. 

t  I  have  here  to  correct  statements  which  will  be  found  in  more 
than  one  place  in  writings  of  my  own.  Although  I  had  carefully  gone 
through  the  whole  series  of  Sir  William  Herschel's  papers  four  or  five 
years  ago,  I  failed  to  notice  that  his  views  had  undergone  a  com- 
plete change.  Having  then  been  led,  by  researches  of  my  own,  to  feel 
grave  doubts  respecting  the  generally  accepted  theory  of  the  star- 
system,  or  rather  to  feel  absolutely  certain  that  that  theory  is  unsound, 
I  have  spoken  of  it  as  Herschel's,  when  discussing  the  objections  which 
I  have  had  to  note  against  it.  A  more  careful  study  of  Herschel's  own 
words  has  shewn  me  that,  though  the  theory  was  undoubtedly 
enunciated  by  him,  he  was  the  first  to  abandon  it.  I  believe  the 
mistake  I  fell  into  is  common  with  those  who  have  given  to  Herschel's 
papers  but  a  single  persual.  Even  the  laborious  Struve  fell  into  the 
same  error ;  and  it  was  only  after  a  careful  re-examination  of  Sir  William 
Herschel's  papers,  that  he  wrote,  "Nous  parvenons  au  resultat,  peut- 


The  Star- Depths.  197 

And  he  noted,  in  a  special  manner,  how  he  judged  that 
certain  portions  of  the  Milky  Way  were  constituted.  For 
speaking  of  the  great  clustering  aggregations,  which 
can  be  observed  along  various  portions  of  the  Galaxy,  he 
expressed  his  belief  that  these  aggregations  are  globular 
in  form. 

Now  if  the  stars  seen  within  a  certain  circular  region  in 
the  heavens,  are  enclosed  in  reality  within  a  globular  space, 
we  can  infer  the  relative  distances  of  the  nearest  and 
farthest  stars  witfiin  the  region.  We  cannot  tell  which 
stars  are  nearer,  and  which  are  farther,  neither  can  we  tell 
the  actual  distances  of  any  stars  within  the  circular  region 
but  we  can  assure  ourselves  that  the  distances  of  the 
farther  stars  do  not  exceed  the  distances  of  the  nearest  in 
more  than  a  certain  proportion.  If  we  look  at  a  spherical 
balloon  far  away  in  the  upper  regions  of  air,  we  may  be 
quite  unable  to  tell  how  far  off  the  balloon  is  or  how  large 
it  is,  or  therefore  by  how  much  the  distance  of  the  farthest 
part  of  the  balloon  exceeds  the  distance  of  the  nearest  part ; 
but  though  we  cannot  tell  by  what  amount,  we  can  tell 
quite  certainly  in  what  degree  the  distance  of  the  farthest 
part  exceeds  the  distance  of  the  nearest.  For  this  relation 
depends  only  on  the  apparent  size  of  the  balloon,  and  re- 
mains precisely  the  same  whether  the  balloon  is  near  and 
small,  or  far  away  and  large.  Supposing  the  balloon  had 


etre  inattendu,  mais  incontestable,  que  le  systeme  de  Herschel,  e'nonce' 
en  1785,  sur  1'arrangement  de  la  Voie  Lacte"e,  s'ecroulede  toutes  parts, 
d'apres  les  recherches  ult4rieures  de  I'auteur  ;  et  que  Herschel  luimeme 
1'a  entierement  abandonne. ' 


1 98  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

no  car,  nor  carried  any  object  of  known  dimensions,  as  a 
man  or  pony  or  sheep,  we  might  believe  that  the  farthest 
point  of  the  silken  covering  was  ten  yards,  or  ten  feet,  or 
but  ten  inches  farther  away  than  the  nearest  point ;  but 
we  should  be  in  no  doubt  whatever  as  to  the  relative 
distances  of  these  two  points.  In  fact,  if  we  were  to  hold 
up  a  small  ball,  as  a  marble  or  a  bagatelle-ball,  so  as  just 
to  hide  the  balloon,  the  relation  between  the  distances  of 
the  farthest  and  nearest  points  of  the  ball  would  be  exactly 
the  same  as  the  relation  between  the  distances  of  the 
farthest  and  nearest  points  of  the  balloon.  And  in  precisely 
the  same  way,  if  one  were  to  hold  up  a  ball  so  as  to  hide 
one  of  the  great  globular  clustering  aggregations  of  stars 
in  the  Galaxy,  we  should  know  that  the  distance  of  the 
farthest  star  in  that  aggregation  exceeds  the  distance 
of  the  nearest  star,  in  the  same  degree  that  the  dis- 
tance of  the  farthest  point  of  the  ball  exceeds  that  of  the 
nearest. 

This  result  is  so  important,  that  I  need  make  no  excuse 
for  having  thus,  at  some  length,  urged  its  real  nature  upon 
the  attention  of  the  reader.  For  let  us  consider  what  the 
lesson  thus  taught  us  respecting  these  star-clusters  in 
reality  implies.  In  these  clustering  aggregations  we 
commonly  see  stars  of  all  orders,  from  certain  not  very 
conspicuous  orbs — say  stars  of  the  seventh  or  eighth  magni- 
tude— down  to  stars  so  faint  that  they  are  barely  visible, 
even  in  the  most  powerful  telescopes  with  which  the 
Herschels,  Eosse,  Lassell,  and  Bond,  have  explored  the 
depths  of  space.  Nay,  in  some  of  these  clusters,  there  are 


The  Star- Depths.  199 

regions  in  which,  after  the  highest  powers  of  the  largest 
telescopes  have  been  applied,  faint  patches  of  cloudy  light 
remain  still  unresolved  into  stars.  Now  according  to  the 
theory  first  entertained  by  Herschel,  the  faintest  stars  in 
these  clusters,  and  especially  the  faint  unresolved  star-dust, 
(if  one  may  so  speak,)  would  be  regarded  as  many  times 
farther  away  than  the  stars  of  the  seventh  or  eighth 
magnitude  belonging  to  the  same  cluster.  There  would, 
in  fact,  be  stars  of  all  orders  of  distance,  corresponding  to 
the  various  orders  of  apparent  magnitude,  from  the  seventh 
downwards.  But  when  once  it  is  admitted  that  these 
clustering  aggregations  are  globular  in  their  general  form, 
we  can  no  longer  admit  such  an  interpretation  of  the 
various  orders  of  magnitude  seen  among  the  stars  which 
form  the  clustre.  The  fainter  stars  are  certainly  not  many 
times  farther  away  than  the  brighter,  certainly  not  twice 
as  far  away,  nor  half  as  far  again.  The  relative  minute- 
ness of  these  fainter  orbs,  and  their  relative  closeness  to 
each  other,  are  real  and  not  merely  apparent  phenomena. 
Stars  which  the  earlier  theory  would  have  taught  us  to 
regard  as  not  smaller  nor  more  closely  set  than  the 
brighter,  but  about  ten  times  as  far  off,  are  shewn  to  be  a 
thousand  times  smaller,  and  set  a  thousand  times  more 
closely;*  stars  which  the  earlier  theory  would  have 
placed  one  hundred  times  farther  away  than  the  brighter 

*  The  average  distances  separating,  star  from  star  would  be  in  this 
case  but  ten  times  smaller,  and  in  the  following  but  a  hundred  times  ; 
but  the  number  of  stars  included  in  a  given  region  of  space  would  be, 
respectively,  a  thousand  and  a  million  times  greater ;  and  these 
relations  may  properly  be  described  in  the  words  used  in  the  text. 


2OO  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

stars  in  a  cluster,  are  now  found  to  be  a  million  times 
smaller,  and  set  a  million  times  more  closely. 

It  will  be  seen  at  once  that  the  wonderful  variety  of 
structure  recognized  by  the  telescopists  in  the  richer 
regions  of  the  Milky  Way,  receives  quite  a  new  interpreta- 
tion when  the  later  views  of  Sir  William  Herschel  are 
accepted.  Few  who  have  not  studied  the  Galaxy  with 
the  telescope,  can  be  aware  of  the  real  complexity  of 
that  marvellous  system  of  stars.  I  know,  indeed,  of 
nothing  which  is  better  calculated  to  impress  the  observer 
with  a  sense  of  the  real  magnificence  of  the  stellar  system, 
than  a  view,  even  through  a  telescope  of  moderate  power, 
of  the  glorious  star-depths  in  the  constellations  Cygnus, 
Aquila,  and  Perseus.  In  telescopes  of  great  power,  these 
regions  and  others,  more  especially  some  in  the  southern 
heavens,  present  a  display  so  marvellous,  that  all  descrip- 
tion must  fail  to  convey  any  just  conception  of  its 
splendour. 

I  have  had  occasion  lately  to  study  somewhat  attentively 
the  laws  according  to  which  the  stars  are  distributed  in 
the  more  densely  aggregated  regions  of  the  Milky  Way ; 
for  I  have  constructed  a  circular  chart,  two  feet  in  diameter, 
in  which  all  the  northern  stars  which  can  be  seen  with  a 
telescope  two  and  three-quarter  inches  in  aperture,  are 
included.  In  all  there  are  324,1 98  stars  in  this  chart,  and 
therefore  about  one  hundred  and  fifty  times  as  many  as 
can  be  seen  with  the  unaided  eye  on  the  darkest  and 
clearest  night.  It  is  wonderful,  indeed,  when  contem- 
plating this  immense  congregation  of  stars,  to  consider  that 


The  Star- Depths.  201 

the  same  portion  of  the  heavens,  if  surveyed  completely 
with  the  gauging  telescopes  of  the  Herschels,  would  shew 
twenty  or  thirty  times  as  many  stars.  But  even  among 
the  stars  which  smaller  telescopes  exhibit,  there  are  signs 
of  definite  laws  of  arrangement  too  well  marked  to  be 
regarded  as  merely  accidental — that  is,  as  implying 
no  real  connection  between  the  stars  thus  seemingly 
associated. 

When  larger  telescopes  are  applied  to  the  same  rich 
regions  of  the  heavens,  fresh  peculiarities  are  brought  into 
view.  Father  Secchi  of  Eome  speaks  thus  of  the  distribution 
of  stars  within  a  certain  very  bright  portion  of  the  Milky 
Way  in  the  constellation  Sagittarius,  as  revealed  by  the 
powers  of  the  fine  refracting  telescope  of  the  Roman 
Observatory  : — '  There  are  large  stars  and  lucid  clusters  ; 
then  a  layer  of  smaller  stars  certainly  below  the  twelfth 
magnitude ;  then  a  nebulous  stratum  with  occasional 
openings.'  But  what  startled  him  and  all  to  whom  he 
shewed  it,  was  the  regular  disposition  of  the  stars  in  figures* 
so  geometrical  that  it  is  impossible  to  regard  them  as 
accidental.  '  They  are  for  the  most  part  like  the  arcs  of  a 
spiral ;  one  can  count  as  many  as  ten  or  twelve  stars  of 
the  ninth  and  tenth  magnitude — following  each  other  on 
the  same  curve  like  the  beads  on  a  rosary ;  sometimes  they 
seem  to  diverge  from  a  common  centre,  and,  strangely 
enough,  it  usually  happens  that  either  at  the  centre  of  the 

*  Thus  far  the  qiiotation  is  from  Webb's  charming  little  work  entitled 
'  Celestial  Objects  for  common  Telescopes,'  who  has  summarised  Secchi's 
remarks  ;  the  remainder  of  the  passage  in  inverted  commas,  is  translated 
from  a  quotation  given  by  Webb  in  the  same  work.  (Note,  p.  267. ) 


2O2  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

rays,  or  at  the  beginning  of  the  branch  of  a  curve,  there  is 
a  larger  star  of  a  red  colour.  It  is  impossible  to  regard  such 
an  arrangement  of  the  stars  as  accidental." 

The  accounts  given  by  Sir  John  Herschel  of  various 
parts  of  the  Milky  Way,  as  seen  in  the  southern  hemi- 
sphere, afford  even  more  remarkable  evidence  of  the 
singularly  varied  and  complex  nature  of  the  star-grouping 
in  those  richer  parts  of  the  Galaxy.  The  following 
passage  serves  to  give  some  idea  of  the  nature  of  this 
evidence.  I  quote  the  passage  as  it  appears  in  Herschel's 
splendid  work  entitled  'Observations  made  at  the  South 
Cape/ so  far,  at  least,  as  respects  the  sequence  of  the  remarks ; 
here  and  there  certain  technical  phrases  have  been  omitted 
or  changed,  since  the  passage  otherwise  would  not  be 
suited  to  these  pages :  *  After  passing  the  dark  interval 
between  the  two  streams  of  the  Milky  Way,'  in  Centaurus, 
' the  coming  on  of  the  Milky  Way  is  thus  described' — 
Herschel  is  here  quoting  from  his  note-books :  ' "  The 
edge  of  a  great  nebulous  projection  of  the  Milky  Way  of 
great  extent,  running  horizontally.  The  northern  half  of 
the  field  of  view  has  stars  on  a  black  ground.  After  this 
the  Milky  Way  becomes  very  nebulous,  in  great  cirrous 
masses  and  streaks."  "Further  on  commences  a  series  of 
great  nebulous  and  semi-nebulous  Milky  Way  patches 
over  the  whole  breadth  of  the  zone." '  Then  occur  several 
remarkable  clusters,  * "  among  alternations  of  vacuity  and 
richness  most  surprising,  and  baffling  all  description ; "  as 
the  main  body  of  the  Milky  Way  comes  on,  the  frequency 
and  variety  of  these  masses  increase.'  ....  Further  on, 


The  Star-Depths.  203 

the  following  remarks  occur :  "  The  Milky  Way  is  here 
composed  of  separate,  or  slightly  or  strongly  connected 
clouds  of  semi-nebulous  light ;  and,  as  the  telescope  moves, 
the  appearance  is  that  of  clouds  passing  in  a  scud,  as 
sailors  call  it."  "  I  could  fill  a  catalogue  with  the  clusters 
of  the  sixth  class  which  are  here.  The  Milky  Way  is 
like  sand,  not  strewed  evenly  as  with  a  sieve,  but  as  if 
flung  down  by  handfuls,  (and  both  hands  at  once,) 
leaving  dark  intervals,  and  all  consisting  of  stars  of  the 
fourteenth,  fifteenth,  ...  to  the  twentieth  magnitude,  and 
down  to  nebulosity,  in  a  most  astonishing  manner." 
Again,  "after  an  interval  of  comparative  poverty,  the 
same  phenomenon,  and  even  more  remarkable.  I  cannot 
say  it  is  nebulous.  It  is  all  resolved,  but  the  stars 
are  inconceivably  numerous  and  minute.  There  must 
be  millions  on  millions,  and  all  most  unequally  massed 
together ;  yet  they  nowhere  run  to  nuclei  or  clusters  much 
brighter  in  the  middle."  This  extraordinary  exhibition 
terminates '  nearly  on  the  meridian  marking  the  eighteenth 
hour  of  right  ascension,  '  where  the  Milky  Way  resumes 
its  usual  appearance.' 

If  we  regard  the  Milky  Way  as  a  whole  we  are  equally 
struck  with  the  evidence  of  complexity  of  structure.  As 
described  indeed  in  many  text-books  of  astronomy,  the 
aspect  of  the  Milky  Way  might  be  regarded  as  according 
well  with  the  theory  that  the  stellar  system  is  shaped  like 
a  cloven  flat  disc.  For  we  are  commonly  told  that  the 
Milky  Way  is  a  zone,  or  band,  circling  the  whole  of  the 
celestial  sphere,  and  divided  along  one  half  of  its  length 


204  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

into  two  distinct  streams.  But  as  a  matter  of  fact,  this 
description  is  very  far  indeed  from  accurately  presenting 
the  characteristics  of  the  Milky  Way.  Both  portions  of 
the  descriptions  are  indeed  equally  untrue.  For,  in  the 
first  place,  the  Milky  Way  does  not  circle  the  heavens, 
but  is  in  one  place  cloven  right  across  by  a  wide  dark  rift. 
And  in  the  second  place,  one  can  only  say  of  a  very  small 
portion  of  the  Milky  Way  that  it  is  double.  Near  the 
constellation  Cygnus,  in  the  northern  heavens,  the  Milky 
Way  is  double  ;  but  one  of  the  branches,  after  proceeding 
somewhat  beyond  the  head  of  Ophiuchus  (the  Serpent- 
bearer)  bends  away  from  the  other  branch  and  is  presently 
lost  altogether.  Now  at  the  opposite  side  of  the  heavens, 
near  the  constellation  Crux,  (or  the  Cross,)  the  Milky 
Way  is  again  double ;  but  tracing  the  second  branch  on 
the  side  towards  the  place  where  the  second  branch  on 
the  other  side  loses  itself,  we  presently  find  the  southern 
second  branch  becoming  subdivided  into  several  branches, 
and  these  forming  a  region  of  interlaced  streaks,  accom- 
panied by  patches  of  light,  which  seemed  to  be  quite  dis- 
joined from  all  the  branches.  This  strangely  complex 
region  spreads  out  towards  the  constellation  Libra,  where 
it  loses  itself ;  but  a  well-marked  branch  bending  round 
towards  the  adjacent  continuous  stream  seems  to  end  in 
three  well-marked  patches.  Over  the  whole  of  this 
region,  the  complexity  of  the  Milky  Way,  as  seen  by  the 
naked  eye,  is  fairly  comparable  with  the  complexity  of 
the  telescopic  aspect  of  the  same  region  as  described  by 
Sir  John  HerscheL 


The  Star-Depths.  205 

Even  in  our  northern  heavens,  however,  there  are 
regions  which  are  singularly  complex,  and  as  it  were 
variegated.  '  It  is  indeed,'  says  Professor  Nichol,  '  only  to 
the  most  careless  glance,  or  when  viewed  through  an  at- 
mosphere of  imperfect  transparency,  that  the  Milky  Way 
seems  a  continuous  zone.  Let  the  naked  eye  rest  thought- 
fully on  any  part  of  it ;  and  if  circumstances  be  favourable, 
it  will  stand  out  rather  as  an  accumulation  of  patches  and 
streams  of  light,  of  every  conceivable  variety  of  form  and 
brightness  ;  now  side  by  side,  now  heaped  on  each  other  ; 
again  spanning  across  dark  spaces,  intertwining  and 
forming  a  most  curious  and  complex  net-work;  and  at 
other  times  darting  off  into  the  neighbouring  skies  in 
branches  of  capricious  length  and  shape,  which  gradu- 
ally thin  away  and  disappear.' 

Thus  far  I  have  been  dealing  only  with  the  general  laws 
of  star-distribution.  I  have  endeavoured  to  shew  that 
instead  of  a  system  of  suns  spread  with  a  general  uniform- 
ity throughout  space,  we  have  to  deal  with  orbs  differing 
widely  from  each  other  in  magnitude,  and  distributed 
throughout  space  in  the  most  varied  manner.  Streams  and 
branches  of  stars,  strangely  shaped  groups,  forming,  as 
regards  their  seeming  arrangement,  the  most  complex  re- 
ticulations ;  islands  of  light  and  lakes  of  darkness,  result- 
ing from  the  aggregation  of  stars  towards  certain  regions 
and  their  segregation  from  others  ; — these,  and  other 
phenomena  of  a  similarly  perplexing  nature,  serve  at  least 
to  shew  that  the  star-system  has  not  that  simplicity  of 
structure  so  commonly  assigned  to  it  in  our  text-books  of 


206  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

astronomy.  But  we  have  still  to  consider  details.  Among 
the  wonders  of  the  star-depths,  there  are  to  be  noted  phen- 
omena even  more  wonderful  than  those  general  features 
which  have  hitherto  been  dealt  with.  Coloured  stars; 
double  and  multiple  stars  ;  periodic,  variable,  and  tempor- 
ary stars ;  the  various  orders  of  star-clusters,  star-cloudlets, 
and  star-mist ;  these  are  among  the  wonders  of  the  star- 
depths.  With  them  we  have  now  to  deal,  considering 
them  rather  for  the  evidence  they  afford  respecting  the 
richness  and  variety  of  the  sidereal  system  than  with 
special  reference  to  the  features  of  individual  objects 
belonging  to  these  various  classes.  "With  respect  to  some 
of  them,  indeed,  my  chief  task  will  be  to  shew  reasons  for 
believing  that  they  really  do  belong  to  the  star-depths ; 
and  not,  as  has  hitherto  been  commonly  judged,  to  regions 
of  space  lying  far  beyond  the  bounds  of  our  own  star- 
system. 

Let  us  pause  for  a  moment  to  survey  the  ground  over 
which  we  have  passed. 

We  have  considered  the  scale  on  which  the  stellar 
universe  has  been  formed,  and  the  general  varieties  of 
structure  observable  within  the  range  of  telescopic  vision. 
We  have  seen  that,  compared  with  distances  separating 
star  from  star,  the  dimensions  of  our  Sun,  and  even  of  the 
system  over  which  he  bears  sway,  sink  into  utter  insignifi- 
cance. And  then,  endeavouring  to  picture  to  ourselves 
the  manner  in  which  these  star-ranges  are  distributed — 
the  plan  on  which  this  system  of  magnificent  distances  is 
formed — we  have  seen  reason  to  believe  that  a  variety  of 


The  Star- Depths.  207 

distribution  prevails  which  renders  the  scheme  of  stars 
singularly  difficult  to  interpret  aright.  So  long  as  we 
could  believe  in  uniformity  either  of  dimensions  or  dis- 
tribution, we  could  deduce  certain  conclusions  as  to  the 
structure  of  the  great  star-system.  Varieties  of  appear- 
ance were  then  at  once  explicable,  as  due  either  to  the 
various  distances  at  which  the  particular  regions  under 
survey  were  placed,  or  else  to  the  various  depths  to  which 
the  telescopic  sounding-line  penetrates  before  reaching  the 
limits  of  the  star-system.  But  so  soon  as  we  are  led  to 
doubt  whether  any  sort  of  uniformity  exists  within  the 
star-depths,  we  lose  at  once  the  means  of  readily  interpret- 
ing the  scene  disclosed  to  us  in  the  telescopic  survey  of  the 
heavens.  A  region  which  appears  singularly  rich  in  stars 
may  be  a  true  star-cluster — a  subordinate  star- system — or 
it  may  be  a  region  where  the  bine  of  sight  passes  through 
an  almost  interminable  range  of  stars.  Seemingly  minute 
stars  may  form  schemes  of  suns  far  smaller  than  our  own, 
or  than  any  of  the  leading  orbs  of  the  heavens  ;  or  they  may 
be  orbs  surpassing  even  Sinus  in  magnitude  and  splendour, 
but  set  at  depths  compared  with  which  his  enormous 
distance  is  relatively  as  insignificant  as  the  distance  of  our 
moon  compared  with  the  dimensions  of  the  Solar  System. 
A  cloud  of  light  in  the  star-depths  may  be  a  vast  mass  of 
nebulous  matter,  or  it  may  be  a  scheme  of  stars  as 
magnificent  as  the  most  splendid  of  all  the  star-clusters 
discernible  with  the  telescope. 

It  does  not  follow  that  in  the  presence  of  these  sources 
of  perplexity  we  need  wholly  despair  of  solving  the  pro- 


208  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

blems  presented  by  the  star-depths ;  but  it  becomes  more 
necessary  than  ever  to  exercise  extreme  caution  at  each 
step  of  our  progress.  We  must  avail  ourselves  of  every 
method  of  research  or  inquiry  which  promises  to  throw 
the  least  light  on  the  very  difficult  questions  we  have  to 
deal  with.  'In  the  midst  of  so  much  darkness,'  wrote 
Sir  John  Herschel  to  me  on  this  point,  '  we  ought  to  open 
our  eyes  as  wide  as  possible  to  any  glimpse  of  light,  and  to 
utilize  whatever  twilight  may  be  accorded  to  us,  to  make 
out  though  but  indistinctly  the  forms  that  surround  us.' 

It  is  not  in  this  place  indeed  that  this  searching 
analysis  should  be  undertaken.  My  purpose  in  writing 
these  lines  is  not  to  exhibit  in  detail  the  reasoning  by 
which  certain  conclusions  may  be  attained,  but  rather  to 
present  an  account  of  what  is  known  or  may  be  inferred 
respecting  the  stellar  depths.  But  it  is  well  that  the 
reader  should  notice  that  the  facts  to  be  described  have 
an  interest  other  than  that  which  they  derive  from  their 
intrinsic  importance,  inasmuch  as  it  is  to  them  chiefly 
that  we  are  to  look  for  hints  to  guide  us  in  the  attempt  to 
solve  the  noblest  problem  ever  attacked  by  man. 

We  have  already  had  abundant  reasons  for  believing 
that '  one  star  differeth  from  another  in  glory,'  not  merely 
as  seen  upon  the  heavens,  but  in  reality,  and  to  an  extent 
which  corresponds  with  the  variety  of  dimensions  recog- 
nized among  the  members  of  the  Solar  System  itself.  Let 
us  now  briefly  consider  the  evidence  we  have  of  an  equally 
remarkable  variety  of  condition  and  constitution  among 
the  stars  composing  our  galaxy. 


The  Star-Depths.  209 

In  the  first  place,  we  can  infer  from  the  different 
colours  of  the  stars,  that  their  condition,  and  the  condition 
also  of  worlds  dependent  upon  them,  must  differ  to  a 
corresponding  extent.  Even  the  naked  eye  recognizes 
remarkable  diversities  of  star-colour ;  but  it  is  only  when 
the  telescope  is  directed  to  the  work  of  survey  that 
the  true  extent  of  these  diversities  is  fully  recognized. 
Confining  our  attention  for  the  present  to  single  stars,  it  is 
to  be  noticed  that  every  variety  of  pure  colour — that  is,  of 
the  hues  seen  in  the  prismatic  spectrum — from  bluish  and 
greenish,  (not  full  green  or  blue,)  through  yellow,  orange, 
ruddy,  and  full  red,  even  to  the  deepest  ruby,  may  be  re- 
cognized among  isolated  stars.  But  no  isolated  stars  of  a 
full  blue  or  green  colour  have  yet  been  detected.* 

Here  we  have  an  instance  of  variety  of  condition  which 
cannot  but  be  regarded  as  highly  significant.  In  what- 
ever way  we  explain  the  colour  of  a  red  or  orange  star  on 
the  one  hand,  or  of  a  greenish  or  bluish  star  on  the  other, 
we  cannot  but  admit  that  they  must  differ  markedly  in 
condition  and  that  the  condition  of  either  must  be  markedly 
different  from  that  of  a  white  star.  A  red  star  may  be 
heated  in  different  degree  than  a  white  star,  or  it  may  be 
suiTOunded  by  absorbing  vapours  different  in  character 
from  those  which  surround  an  orb  of  the  latter  class,  or  the 

*  This,  however,  has  been  questioned,  since  some  observers  (and 
notably  the  late  Admiral  Smyth)  have  considered  certain  isolated 
stars  to  be  decidedly  blue  or  green.  The  general  opinion  is  in  favour 
of  those  who  assert  that  the  blue  or  green  hues  of  these  stars  are  not 
well  marked,  and  that  a  peculiarity  of  vision  has  led  the  before  men- 
tioned observers  into  error. 


2  io  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

difference  of  aspect  may  be  explicable  in  some  other 
manner ;  but  it  is  not  conceivable  that  any  explanation  can 
present  two  such  stars  as  alike,  or  nearly  alike,  in  their 
physical  condition.  And  so  of  other  distinctions  of  colour. 

We  are  not  left  in  doubt,  however,  on  this  point ;  for 
the  spectroscope  exhibits  to  us  the  nature  of  the  character- 
istic difference  between  stars  which  differ  in  colour. 
Father  Secchi  has  been  able,  in  fact,  to  arrange  the  stars 
of  different  colour  into  four  distinct  types,  according  to 
the  character -of  the  rainbow-tinted  streak  into  which  the 
spectroscope  spreads  out  their  light. 

First  in  order  are  the  stars  usually  considered  white, 
but  in  reality  shining  with  a  somewhat  bluish  light. 
Such  are  Sirius,  Vega,  Altair,  Rigel,  and  Regulus,  as  well 
as  all  the  stars  of  Charles's  Wain,  except  Dubhe.  The 
spectrum  of  a  star  of  this  order  '  shews  rays  of  all  the 
seven  colours,  and  is  sometimes  crossed  by  very  numerous 
and  mostly  very  fine  lines,  but  always  by  four  broad  and 
very  dark  lines.  Of  these  four  lines  one  is  in  the  red, 
another  in  the  greenish  blue,  and  the  remaining  two  in  the 
violet.  All  the  four  are  due  to  hydrogen.*  The  spectra 
of  these  stars  shew  also  the  lines  of  sodium,  iron,  and 
magnesium.  '  Nearly  half  the  stars  in  the  heavens,'  (that 
is,  of  those  visible  to  the  unaided  eye,)  '  are  included  in 
this  type,  and  their  spectra  may  be  examined  even  with  a 
telescope  of  small  power.' 

*  From  Dr  Schellen's  fine  work  on  Spectrum  Analysis,  translated  by 
Jane  and  Caroline  Lassell,  and  edited  by  Dr  Huggins,  F.R.S.  See 
further,  "The  Expanse  of  Heaven." 


The  Star -Depths.  2 1 1 

The  second  type  of  fixed  stars  is  that  to  which  our  sun 
belongs.  'In  this  class,'  says  Secchi,  'most  of  the  yellow 
stars  are  included,  as  for  instance,  Capella,  Pollux, 
Arcturus,  Aldebaran,  Dubhe  in  the  Great  Bear,  Procyon, 
&c.  The  dark  lines  are  very  strongly  marked  in  the  red 
and  in  the  blue  portions  of  their  spectra,  but  are  almost 
entirely  absent  in  the  yellow.'  The  well-known  dark  lines 
in  the  solar  spectrum  illustrate  this  peculiarity  ;  yet  it 
should  be  noted  that  though  well-marked  dark  lines  are 
absent  from  the  yellow  part  of  the  spectrum,  fine  lines 
are  present  there  in  great  numbers.  '  The  close  conformity 
to  the  solar  spectrum  undoubtedly  leads  to  the  conclusion,' 
says  Dr  Schellen,  '  that  these  stars  are  composed  of  similar 
elements,  and  possess  a  physical  constitution  in  other 
respects  analogous  to  that  of  our  Sun.'  We  have  seen 
that  about  one  half  the  stars  hitherto  observed  belong  to 
the  first  type.  Secchi  considers  that  the  second  type 
includes  about  two-thirds  of  the  remainder ;  so  that 
already  five-sixths  of  all  the  observed  stars  have  been 
taken  into  account. 

The  third  type  includes  all  the  stars  shining  with  a 
well-marked  red  tint.  As  an  example,  the  brilliant  but 
variable  star  Betelgeux,  which  marks  the  right  shoulder  of 
Orion,  may  be  cited.  The  star  Alpha  Herculis,  in  the 
head  of  the  Kneeling  Hero,  also  belongs  to  this  type. 
"  The  spectra  of  such  stars  appear  like  a  row  of  columns 
illuminated  from  the  side,  producing  a  stereoscopic  effect ; 
and  when  the  bright  bands  are  narrower  than  the  dark 
ones,  the  spectrum  has  the  appearance  of  a  series  of 

10 


2 1 2  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

grooves.  Red  stars  of  even  the  eighth  magnitude  have 
been  examined  spectroscopically  with  Secchi's  admirable 
instrument,  and  shew  a  similar  constitution,  while  no 
spectrum  could  be  obtained  from  white  stars  of  the  same 
magnitude."  The  spectrum  of  stars  of  the  third  type  re- 
sembles in  a  remarkable  degree  the  spectrum  of  a  solar 
spot,  a  circumstance  which  has  led  Secchi  to  regard  these 
as  spot-covered  suns. 

Stars  of  the  fourth  type,  like  those  of  the  third,  have  a 
spectrum  presenting  a  columnar  appearance ;  but  the 
number  of  the  columnar  bands  is  less,  and  the  brighter 
side  of  each  band  is  towards  the  violet  end  of  the  spectrum, 
whereas  in  stars  of  the  third  type  the  reverse  is  the  case. 
Into  peculiarities  such  as  these,  however,  we  need  not  here 
enter  at  length,  because  they  do  not  affect  those  general 
relations  with  which  we  are  here  dealing. 

Now,  passing  from  the  consideration  that  these  varieties 
of  the  stellar  spectrum  indicate  corresponding  varieties 
of  elementary  structure  in  the  suns  which  people  space, 
let  us  consider  for  a  moment  how  the  condition  of  in- 
habited worlds  circling  around  other  suns  than  ours  must 
be  affected  by  the  nature  of  the  light  emitted  by  the  orbs 
which  rule  them. 

Our  sun  sends  forth  rays  which  supply  three  very 
different  requirements  of  living  creatures,  animal  and 
vegetable,  peopling  our  earth.  Without  light,  we  should 
all  before  long  perish  miserably  ;  and  the  sun's  rays  supply 
us  with  light.  Without  heat,  we  should  be  even  more 
quickly  destroyed ;  and  the  sun's  rays  provide  ample 


The  Star- Depths.  2 1 3 

supplies  of  heat.  But  besides  light  and  heat,  we  require, 
directly  and  indirectly,  that  chemical  action  of  the  solar 
rays  which  has  been  called  actinism.  Without  this  action 
the  air  we  breathe  would  be  loaded  before  long  with 
pestilential  vapours,  which  would  destroy  the  lives  of  men 
and  animals  ;  plants  would  wither,  and  presently  die  ;  the 
whole  earth,  in  fact,  would  soon  be  the  abode  of  death,  as 
surely,  though  perhaps  not  so  quickly,  as  though  the  sun 
had  ceased  to  supply  either  light  or  heat. 

Now  at  present,  these  three  forms  of  energy  are  exerted 
in  certain  proportions,  admirably  suited  to  our  require- 
ments. Dividing  the  solar  rays  according  to  the  position 
they  occupy  with  reference  to  the  spectrum — we  have 
from  the  red  rays,  and  from  dark  rays  beyond  the  red, 
the  chief  supply  of  heat ;  from  the  whole  visible  spectrum, 
but  chiefly  from  the  yellow  portion,  comes  the  supply  of 
light ;  and  lastly,  the  violet  rays,  and  the  dark  rays  beyond 
the  violet,  afford  the  chief  supply  of  actinism.  If  any 
change  were  to  pass  over  our  sun  whereby  the  proportion 
of  heat  and  light  and  actinism  were  appreciably  modified, 
we  should  undoubtedly  suffer  sooner  or  later.  If  the 
modification  were  considerable,  all  plants  and  animals 
would  probably  perish.  But  if  our  sun's  rays  were  so 
affected  that  he  was  visibly  changed  in  colour — either  to 
our  own  eyes,  or  to  the  inhabitants  of  some  far  distant 
world  whence  our  sun  is  seen  as  a  star — there  can  be  no 
question  that  this  change  would  result  in  a  considerable 
modification  of  the  proportion  in  which  heat,  light,  and 
actinism  reach  our  earth.  For  we  have  seen  that  varieties 


214  ®ur  Place  among  Infinities, 

of  stellar  colour  imply  varieties  in  tlie  stellar  spectra, 
some  stars  having  the  red  or  heat  end  relatively  more 
brilliant  than  the  rest  of  the  spectrum,  others  having  the 
yellow  or  light  portion  in  relative  excess,  others  the  violet 
or  actinic  portion.  Since,  then,  the  creatures  living  on 
this  earth  would  unquestionably  suffer  if  our  sun  were  so 
changed  as  to  resemble  stars  of  certain  colours,  it  follows 

O 

that  the  creatures  in  worlds  circling  around  stars  of  those 
colours  must  differ  in  many  important  respects  from  those 
existing  on  our  own  earth.  So  that  the  varied  tints  seen 
amid  the  star-depths  supply  evidence  of  a  corresponding 
variety  in  the  scenes  displayed  by  the  unnumbered 
myriads  of  worlds  circling  around  other  suns  than  our  own. 

In  passing  from  isolated  suns  to  double  and  multiple 
star-systems,  I  scarcely  know  whether  to  dwell  chiefly  on 
the  varieties  of  arrangement  observable  in  these  systems 
or  on  the  singularly-marked  and  beautiful  colours  seen 
among  them,  as  the  more  striking  illustration  of  the  com- 
plexity of  the  scheme  according  to  which  the  universe  has 
been  formed.  But  as  the  subject  of  colour  has  already 
been  discussed,  it  may  be  well  to  consider  the  former  re- 
lation more  particularly  at  this  point. 

If  we  consider  only  the  double  stars,  we  find  a  perfectly 
marvellous  variety  of  arrangement  as  respects  magnitude 
and  distance.  In  some  pairs  the  component  stars  are  equal, 
in  others  we  find  every  degree  of  disproportion  in  the  mag- 
nitudes of  the  components,  from  a  slight  inequality  down 
to  such  an  enormous  disproportion  as  in  the  case  of  Sirius 
or  Antures,  where  the  chief  star  is  a  brilliant  of  the  leading 


The  Star-Depths.  215 

order,  (a  '  double  first, '  as  it  were,)  and  the  companion  is 
barely  visible  in  powerful  telescopes.  As  respects  distance, 
it  is  not  possible  to  speak  quite  so  confidently — at  least, 
in  any  specified  instance  ;  since  a  pair  whose  components 
appear  to  be  very  close  together  may  in  reality  be 
separated  by  a  distance  exceeding  that  which  separates  a 
'  wide  double. '  But  among  so  many  thousands  of  double 
stars  which  have  come  under  telescopic  scrutiny,  this 
difficulty  need  not  perplex  us,  since  the  laws  of  averages 
assure  us  that  peculiarities  of  arrangement  will  not  prevail 
in  a  large  array  of  instances.  So  that  we  may  feel  assured 
that  the  observed  immense  variety  in  the  distance  of 
double  stars — whether  in  the  actual  observed  distance,  or 
in  the  relation  between  this  distance  and  the  seeming 
magnitudes  of  the  component  stars — corresponds  to  an 
equally  immense  variety  in  the  real  distances.  Then  the 
subject  of  colour  enters  into  the  question  of  arrangement 
(apart  from  the  evidence  it  supplies  as  to  elementary 
constitution,)  and  here  again  we  find  the  most  surprising 
variety.  We  have  pairs  of  white,  yellow,  orange,  and  red 
stars ;  then  we  have  red  and  white  pairs,  red  and  yellow, 
red  and  orange,  and  so  on,  with  all  such  combinations, 
the  larger  or  smaller  star  having  either  colour  of  any  such 
pair;  again,  we  have  white  and  blue,  white  and  green, 
white  and  violet,  red  and  blue,  red  and  green,  red  and 
violet,  and  so  on,  the  larger  star  in  all  such  cases  being 
white,  yellow,  orange,  or  red,  and  the  smaller  blue,  green, 
violet,  or  purple.  We  have  also  small  companion  stars, 
coloured  lilac,  fawn,  dun,  buff,  ashen  grey,  livid,  olive,  russet, 


2 1 6  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

citron,  and  so  on,  to  say  nothing  of  colours  so  peculiar  that 
no  ordinary  name  can  be  given  to  them.* 

If  we  regard  a  pair  of  stars  as  forming  a  double  sun 
round  which,  or  rather  round  the  common  centre  of  which, 
other  orbs  revolve  as  planets,  we  are  struck  by  the  differ- 
ence between  such  a  scheme  and  our  own  Solar  system  ; 
but  we  find  the  difference  yet  more  surprising,  when  we 
consider  the  possibility  that  in  some  such  schemes  each 
component  sun  may  have  its  own  distinct  system  of 
dependent  worlds.  In  the  former  case,  the  ordinary  state 
of  things  would  probably  be  such  that  both  the  suns 
would  be  above  the  horizon  at  the  same  time  and  then 
probably  their  distinctive  peculiarities  would  only  be 
recognizable  when  one  chanced  to  pass  over  the  disc  of  the 
other,  as  our  inoon  passes  over  the  sun's  disc  in  eclipses. 
For  short  intervals  of  time,  however,  at  rising  or  setting, 
one  or  other  would  be  visible  alone ;  and  the  phenomena 
of  sunset  and  sunrise  must  therefore  be  very  varied,  and 
also  exquisitely  beautiful,  in  worlds  circling  round  such 
double  suns.  But  where  each  sun  has  a  separate  system, 
even  more  remarkable  relations  must  be  presented.  For 
each  system  of  dependent  worlds,  besides  its  own  proper 
sun,  must  have  another  sun,  less  splendid,  perhaps, 
(because  farther  off,)  but  still  brighter  beyond  com- 
parison than  our  moon  at  the  full.  And  according  to  the 

*  For  such  a  colour  the  celebrated  astronomer,  W.  Struve,  invented 
the  pleasing  name,  '  olivaceasubrubicunda, '  respecting  which  the  author 
of  '  Celestial  Objects  for  common  Telescopes '  remarks  that  it  matches 
Gruithuisen's  '  stickstoff'sauerstoffatmospUare, '  and  (an  English  chemist's 
invention)  the  iodide  of  methylodiethylamylammonium. 


The  Star-Depths.  217 

position  of  any  planet  of  either  sytem,  there  will  result 
for  the  time  being  either  an  interchange  of  suns  instead  of 
the  change  from  night  to  day,  or  else  double  sunlight 
during  the  day,  and  a  corresponding  intensified  contrast 
between  night  and  day.  Where  the  two  suns  are  very 
unequal,  or  very  differently  coloured,  or  where  the  orbital 
path  of  each  is  very  eccentric,  so  that  they  are  sometimes 
close  together,  and  at  others  far  apart,  the  varieties  of  con- 
dition in  the  worlds  circling  around  either,  or  around  the 
common  centre  of  both,  must  be  yet  more  remarkable. 
'  It  must  be  confessed, '  we  may  well  say  with  Sir  John 
Herschel,  '  that  we  have  here  a  strangely  wide  and  novel 
field  for  speculative  excursions,  and  one  which  it  is  not  easy 
to  avoid  luxuriating  in. ' 

If  it  be  supposed  that  in  some  instances  the  smaller 
component  of  a  double  system  shines  either  wholly  or  to  a 
considerable  degree  by  reflecting  the  light  of  its  primary, 
we  shall  find  yet  further  reason  for  wonder  at  the  diversity 
of  structure  within  the  star-depths.  For  unquestionably 
the  largest  of  all  the  planets  which  circle  around  the  Sun 
would  not  be  visible  even  under  the  most  powerful 
telescopic  scrutiny,  at  the  distance  of  the  nearest  fixed 
star.  Nay,  an  opaque  orb  as  large  as  our  Sun,  if  placed 
where  Jupiter  is,  would  not  reflect  a  tenth  part  of  the 
light  necessary  to  render  it  visible  at  such  a  distance. 

But  such  considerations  as  these  become  perfectly 
bewildering  when  extended  to  triple,  quadruple,  and 
generally  to  multiple  star-systems.  It  will  afford  some 
idea  of  the  amazing  variety  of  arrangement  observable 


2 1 8  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

among  such  systems,  that  even  among  the  host  of  triple 
stars  already  observed  by  astronomers,  not  two  have  been 
found  which  closely  resemble  each  other  in  arrangement, 
while,  so  soon  as  we  pass  to  more  complex  systems,  we 
find  that  each  fresh  object  of  the  class  differs  utterly  from 
all  which  have  been  previously  observed. 

In  considering  the  actual  condition  of  the  region  of 
space  occupied  by  a  triple,  quadruple,  or  multiple  star- 
system,  we  find  ourselves  surrounded  on  all  sides  by 
sources  -of  perplexity — so  long,  at  least,  as  we  compare 
the  wrorlds  in  such  regions  with  our  own  earth,  or  with 
any  member  of  the  Solar  system.  All  the  most  marked 
characteristics  of  life  on  our  earth  must  be  wanting  in  those 
worlds  which  circle  around  the  component  suns  of  multiple 
systems.  There  can  be  no  year,  strictly  so  called,  no 
orderly  succession  of  seasons,  no  regular  alternation  of  day 
and  night,  in  many  cases  no  night  at  all,  save  for  brief 
periods  at  exceedingly  long  intervals.  Placed  at  such  a 
distance  from  any  star  of  one  of  these  systems  that  that 
star  appears  as  a  sun,  the  others  also  must  supply  an 
amount  of  light  sufficient  of  itself  to  banish  night.  More 
commonly,  indeed,  each  star  of  such  a  system,  while  above 
the  horizon,  would  be  a  sun  shining  more  brightly  than 
our  sun  does  to  the  inhabitants  of  many  planets  of  his 
scheme.  But  where  there  are  three  or  four  such  suns, 
the  simultaneous  absence  of  all  from  the  sky  must  be 
an  uncommon  event — as  uncommon,  for  instance,  as 
those  occasions  when  none  of  Jupiter's  satellites  can  be 
seen.  The  inhabitants  of  worlds  such  as  these  can  but 


The  Star- Depths.  219 

seldom  witness  the  spectacle  of  the  starlit  sky ;  and  the 
study  of  any  orbs  beyond  their  own  system  must  be  a  task 
of  infinite  difficulty,  since  it  can  only  be  pursued  for  a  few 
occasional  hours  of  darkness,  separated  by  many  months 
of  persistent  daylight. 

The  consideration  of  these  multiple  systems  leads  us  on, 
step  by  step,  to  the  various  orders  of  star-clusters.  For 
we  can  point  to  multiple  systems  of  greater  and  greater 
richness,  and  as  it  were  compactness,  until  we  arrive  at 
orders  which  we  are  compelled  to  regard  as  veritable  star- 
clusters.  Yet  it  is  to  be  noticed  that  we  might  have 
approached  the  study  of  star-clusters  in  a  different 
direction.  For  we  have  already  had  occasion  to  consider 
the  various  degrees  of  stellar  aggregation  in  different  parts 
of  the  heavens ;  and  some  of  the  regions  of  aggregation, 
while  indubitably  features  of  the  galaxy  regarded  as  a 
whole,  are  yet  so  well  defined,  and  so  clearly  separated 
from  the  surrounding  more  barren  regions,  that  we  cannot 
refuse  to  regard  them  as  vast  star-clusters.  We  can  thus 
either  proceed  from  the  smaller  star-clusters — to  which  we 
have  been  led  by  the  study  of  multiple  star-systems — 
onwards  to  larger  and  yet  larger  groups  of  stars,  until  we 
have  arrived  at  the  aggregations  just  mentioned ;  or  we 
can  pass  from  these  through  the  successive  orders  of  a 
diminishing  scale  until  we  arrive  at  multiple  star-systems. 

Yet  here  it  is  well  to  remark  that  a  difficulty  presents 
itself  which  can  only  be  removed  by  the  theory,  to  which 
we  have  been  already  led  by  other  considerations,  that 
the  great  aggregations  of  stars  are  not  (or  at  least,  all  of 


220  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

them  are  not)  to  be  regarded  as  formed  of  orbs  necessarily 
comparable  with  Sirius  and  Arcturus,  Capella,  Vega,  and 
Aldebaran,  in  real  magnitude  and  splendour.  For  we  can 
pass  from  the  single  suns  onwards  to  double  suns,  multiple 
systems,  star-clusters,  and  stellar  aggregations,  thence  to 
less  and  less  condensed  and  more  and  more  extended 
aggregations,  until  we  arrive  at  unaggregated  star-groups, 
consisting,  in  fact,  of  the  single  orbs  with  which  we  set 
out.  Now  it  is  to  be  observed  that  we  seem  to  be  brought 
to  the  single  stars  by  a  course  which  is  not  a  mere  retracing 
of  our  steps.  For  supposing  we  regard  star-clusters  as 
intermediate  between  the  least  condensed  aggregations  on 
the  one  hand,  and  single  stars  on  the  other,  we  pass  onwards 
from  these  least  condensed  aggregations  to  single  stars, 
without  going  through  any  of  the  steps  of  our  progress 
towards  the  aggregations.  Obviously  there  can  have  been 
no  true  progression  here.  And  we  are  compelled  to  believe 
that  by  following  the  course  indicated,  we  arrive  at  quite 
another  order  of  star-groups  than  those  which  form  our 
constellations,  although  in  appearance  the  less  densely 
aggregated  star-groups  may  resemble  systems  of  true  suns, 
like  Sirius  and  Arcturus,  Aldebaran  and  Capella. 

But  the  fact  is  that,  again  and  again,  as  we  contemplate 
the  wonders  of  the  star-depths,  we  find  ourselves  thus 
tracing  out  perplexing  sequences,  one  class  of  objects 
merging  into  another  class  seemingly  altogether  distinct, 
and  this  class  into  yet  another,  until  we  are  bewildered  by 
the  multiplicity  of  analogies  whereof  some  at  least  must 
be  deceptive. 


The  Star- Depths.  221 

For  instance,  I  have  spoken  of  the  various  orders  of 
star-clusters  by  which  we  may  be  led  to  the  vast  stellar 
aggregations  ;  and  there  can  be  no  question  whatever  that 
an  apparently  perfect  sequence  can  be  traced  from  sharply- 
defined  clusters  such  as  the  magnificent  object  '13  Messier' 
in  the  constellation  Hercules,  to  such  groups  as  the  Pleiades, 
or  Prsesepe  in  Cancer,  or  the  splendid  star-clusters  near 
the  sword-hand  of  Perseus,  these  groups  being  undoubtedly 
mere  condensations  in  rich  star-regions.  It  also  cannot 
be  doubted  that  we  can  pass  from  such  a  cluster  as  the 
one  in  Hercules,  to  others  less  rich  in  numbers,  but  equally 
compact,  and  so  to  clusters  continually  poorer  and  poorer 
(numerically)  until  we  arrive  at  mere  multiple  systems, 
and  so  to  quadruple,  triple,  double,  and  single  stars.  But 
it  is  equally  certain  that  we  can  pass  from  the  globular 
star-clusters  to  others  oval  in  shape,  and  more  and  more 
closely  set,*  until  at  length  we  arrive  at  the  nebulae, 
properly  so  called — that  is,  spots  of  cloudy  light  which 
have  not  been  resolved  into  separate  stars  by  any  telescopic 
power  yet  applied.  Here,  then,  a  progression  as  real  as 
either  of  the  preceding  seems  to  lead  us  to  objects  which 
have  been  commonly  regarded  as  wholly  distinct  from  any 
portions  of  the  galactic  system,  and  probably  analogues  of 
the  whole  of  that  system. 

*  The  connection  between  shape  and  closeness  of  star- setting  is 
certain,  though  most  perplexing.  Sir  John  Herschel  writes  : — 'It  may 
be  generally  remarked,  as  a  fact  undoubtedly  connected  in  some  very 
intimate  manner  with  the  dynamical  conditions  of  their  subsistence, 
that  the  elliptic  nebulae  are,  for  the  most  part,  beyond  comparison  more 
difficult  of  resolution  than  those  of  globular  form. 


222  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

But  it  may  be  urged  that  this  progression  may  relate 
simply  to  distance,  and  that  therefore  we  need  not  regard 
it  as  forming  a  new  and  distinct  sequence.  To  illustrate 
the  matter,  suppose  that  we  could  recognize  among  the 
companies  of  persons  proceeding  along  a  road, — many 
different  kinds  of  groups — and  that  we  arranged  these 
different  orders  into  a  perfect  sequence ;  then,  taking  any 
given  order,  we  should  find  the  various  groups  belonging 
to  this  order  presenting  different  aspects  according  to  their 
distance.  Say  the  order  comprised  sets  of  persons  travell- 
ing six  together ;  then  a  set  of  six  close  by  would  differ  in 
appearance  from  a  set  of  six  far  away;  and  we  might  form 
many  sets  of  six  at  different  distances  into  a  perfect 
sequence,  according  to  their  varying  appearance. 

Now  according  to  this  view  of  the  matter  the  various 
orders  of  regularly-shaped  nebulae,  even  down  to  those 
which  no  telescope  can  resolve,  would  be  star-clusters 
lying  at  great  distances.  And  since  the  star-clusters, 
properly  so  called,  must  be  regarded  as  belonging  to  our 
own  galactic  system,  it  would  follow  that  all  the  orders  of 
nebulae  belong  to  that  system.  We  should  at  least  find  it 
it  very  difficult  to  say  up  to  what  point  this  complete 
sequence  of  objects  belonged  to  our  star-system,  and  where 
external  star-systems  began  to  be  in  question)  and  still  less 
easily  could  we  explain  how  complete  external  systems 
should  thus  be  linked,  as  far  as  appearances  extend,  with 
mere  portions,  and  relatively  minute  portions,  of  our  own 
star-system. 

So  that   whether  we   consider  distance  to  be   solely 


The  Star-DeptJis.  223 

in  question,  or  that  the  various  orders  of  nebulae  are 
associated  with  star-clusters,  as  forming  parts  of  a  real 
sequence  of  objects,  we  alike  find  reason  for  believing  that 
the  nebulas,  or  irresolvable  star-clusters,  belong  to  our  own 
galactic  system. 

But  at  this  stage  a  very  striking  and  beautiful  argument 
can  be  adduced  to  indicate  the  real  place  of  the  nebulse — 
so  long  regarded  as  external  galaxies — in  the  scheme  of 
our  own  galactic  system. 

Tf  we  were  to  mark  down  on  a  globe  the  place  of  every 
nebula  yet  known  to  astronomers,  we  should  not  find  that 
the  marks  were  spread  in  a  random  manner  over  the 
sphere.  On  the  contrary,  we  should  find  them  aggregated 
in  a  well-defined  manner  into  two  large  regions,  separated 
by  a  wide  ring-shaped  region  of  nebular  poverty.  An 
interesting  circumstance,  this,  whatever  opinion  we  may 
form  as  to  the  nature  of  these  star-cloudlets.  Placed  as 
we  are,  in  the  midst  of  a  region  of  star-space,  which 
appears  to  our  conceptions  as  spherical,  the  existence  of 
two  great  clusters  of  nebulas  in  opposite  regions  of  this 
seemingly  spherical  space,  is  a  significant  phenomenon, 
and  one  which  any  theory  of  the  universe,  to  be  established 
on  a  firm  basis,  is  bound  to  account  for.  But  the  circum- 
stance becomes  yet  more  significant  when  we  notice  where, 
on  the  star  sphere,  the  intervening  zone  of  barrenness  is 
situated.  If  the  globe  had  been  originally  free  from 
marks,  and  we  sought  to  indicate  by  a  circular  streak  the 
central  circle  of  this  ring-shaped  vacancy,  the  streak 
would  occupy  the  very  place  which  astronomers  have 


2  24  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

assigned  as  the  central  circle  of  the  Milky  Way.  Now  I 
shall  not  pause  here  to  dwell  on  the  significance  of  this 
fact,  though  I  regard  it  as  one  of  the  most  significant  in 
the  whole  array  of  facts  hitherto  learned  respecting  the 
galaxy.  The  special  argument  I  wish  at  present  to 
insist  upon  is  of  a  more  delicate,  though  not  less  significant 
kind.  The  star-clusters,  which  as  we  have  seen  are 
associable  with  (or  rather  not  separable  from)  the  nebula, 
are  also  connected,  as  respects  distribution,,  with  the 
galactic  circle.  But  whereas  the  irresolvable  star-cloudlets 
are  withdrawn  from  the  galactic  region  the  star-clusters 
are  aggregated  over  that  region.  This,  however,  is  not 
all.  If  we  consider  the  various  intermediate  classes  be- 
tween the  brightest  globular  clusters  and  the  faintest  of 
the  irresolvable  star-cloudlets,  we  find  that  their  relation  to 
the  Milky  Way  corresponds  with  their  order  in  the  series  : 
the  brightest  and  most  obviously  stellate  clusters  are 
found  almost  exclusively  within  the  Milky  Way ;  the 
next  order  of  clusters  are  chiefly  in  the  Milky  Way,  but 
a  few  are  met  with  outside  its  borders  ;  the  next  order 
are  but  slightly  aggregated  towards  the  Milky  Way ;  the 
next  are  pretty  evenly  distributed  over  the  heavens  ;  the 
next  are  slightly  segregated  from  the  Milky  Way ;  and 
lastly,  the  actually  irresolvable  star-cloudlets,  though 
counted  by  thousands,  have  scarcely  ten  of  their  order  near 
the  galactic  zone. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  recognize  the  significance  of  these 
facts,  though  it  may  be  exceedingly  difficult  to  give  their 
exact  interpretation.  Any  doubts  we  might  before  have 


The  Star- Depths.  225 

had,  respecting  the  reality  of  the  seqiience  of  association 
linking  together  the  most  stellate  clusters  with  the  faintest 
star-cloudlets,  must  be  removed,  when  we  find  in  their 
distribution  a  law  of  sequence  corresponding  exactly  with 
that  recognized  in  their  aspect.  That  they  all  form  part 
and  parcel  of  one  and  the  same  scheme,  appears  to  me  to  be 
an  inference  as  inevitable  as  it  is  important.  The  whole 
aspect  of  the  universe,  or  of  that  which  is  for  us  the 
universe — that  is,  the  region  of  space  to  which  our  range 
of  research  extends — is  at  once  altered  when  we  are  led  to 
regard  the  star-cloudlets,  which  have  so  long  been  looked 
upon  as  external  galaxies,  as  forming,  instead,  subordinate 
features  of  our  own  star-system.  Nor  is  the  conclusion 
one  which  should  lead  us  to  entertain  less  exalted  ideas  of 
the  real  universe,  although  at  first  sight  we  seem  to  have 
blotted  from  existence  thousands  of  star-systems,  each  as 
important  as  our  own  galaxy.  For  as  certainly  as  we 
must  recognize  the  fact  that  the  external  galaxies  are  at 
least  not  demonstrated  realities,  so  surely  must  we  regard 
the  ideas  which  have  been  entertained  respecting  our  own 
galaxy  as  falling  far  short — infinitely  short,  I  had  almost 
said — of  the  reality.  It's  unnumbered  myriads  of  suns  are 
reinforced,  according  to  these  new  conceptions,  by 
thousands  of  star-systems.  Its  imagined  limits  are 
shewn  to  be  only  the  limits  of  certain  portions  of  its 
extent.  We  find  the  Milky  Way  of  the  Herschels — 
already  chosen  as  the  apt  emblem  of  the  infinite  power  of 
the  Creator — presented  to  us  as  the  merest  fragment 
of  the  great  star-system  to  which  our  Sun  belongs,  the 


226  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

merest  drop  in  the  infinite  star-depths.  In  place  of  an 
unlimited  series  of  star-universes  like  our  own,  we  find 
that  our  own  star-universe  is  unlimited,  or  at  least 
ungaugable  by  the  most  powerful  telescopes  man  has 
yet  constructed. 

I  have  said  in  the  preceding  paragraph  that  the  nebulae 
have  not  been  demonstrated  to  be  external  galaxies, 
assigning  thus  the  lowest  possible  degree  of  significance 
to  the  argument  which  I  myself  regard  as  demonstrating 
that  they  form  part  and  parcel  of  our  own  star-system. 
But  it  cannot  be  too  often  repeated  that  the  reasoning  of 
Sir  John  Herschel  respecting  the  Magellanic  clouds  has 
in  effect  finally  established  the  fact  of  which  I  have  just 
attempted  to  give  an  independent  demonstration.  I  have 
already  indicated  the  bearing  of  his  reasoning  on  our  ideas 
respecting  the  distribution  of  stars  throughout  the  galactic 
system ;  but  the  evidence  he  adduces  is  yet  more  striking 
as  respects  the  nebulae  For  within  the  two  Magellanic 
clouds  are  found  all  orders  of  nebuhe,  from  the  most  ob- 
viously stellate  orders,  to  those  which  Sir  John  Herschel's 
fine  telescope  failed  wholly  to  resolve.  All  classes  of  these 
objects,  then,  exist  within  the  regions  of  space  occupied  by 
the  Magellanic  clouds — regions  which  we  have  already 
seen  to  be  roughly  globular  in  shape,  and  unquestionably 
far  within  the  limits  of  distance  enclosing  our  own 
star-system. 

But  perhaps  the  most  surprising  of  all  the  facts  yet 
ascertained  respecting  the  mysterious  star-depths  surround- 
ing us  on  all  sides,  is  the  circumstance  that  inconceivably 


The  Star-Depths.  227 

vast  spaces  are  occupied  by  gaseous  matter,  shining  with 
a  faintly  luminous  light.  I  have  spoken  hitherto  of 
nebulae  as  star-cloudlets,  and  unquestionably  large  num- 
bers of  these  objects  are  really  composed  of  stars,  and 
give  forth  the  same  sort  of  light  (in  general  respects)  as 
our  sun,  and  other  single  stars.  But  others  have  been 
shewn  by  the  researches  of  our  great  physicist,  Dr. 
Huggins,  to  be  composed  of  luminous  gas  or  vapour.  The 
famous  nebula  in  Orion  is  among  the  number  thus  con- 
stituted, so  are  the  dumb-bell  nebula  in  Vulpecula,  the  ring 
nebula  in  Lyra,  and  other  well-known  objects.  In  the 
southern  hemisphere  the  great  nebula  in  Argo  has  been 
shown  to  be  gaseous,  (by  Captain  Herschel,)  and  the  fine 
irregular  nebula  in  the  greater  Magellanic  Cloud  is  another 
of  these  gaseous  masses.  The  strange  objects  called  the 
planetary  nebulae  are  also  all  gaseous,  so  far  as  these 
researches  have  yet  extended. 

Here  again  we  find  a  distinct  association  between  the 
distribution  of  the  gaseous  nebulae,  and  the  features  of  the 
galaxy.  The  irregular  nebulae,  such  as  the  one  in  Orion, 
the  great  Argo  nebula,  and  the  great  nebular  masses  in 
Sagittarius  and  Cygrms,  are  all  on,  or  else  close  by,  the 
Milky  Way,  with  one  solitary  exception,  the  nebula 
(already  mentioned)  in  the  greater  Magellanic  cloud,  that 
wonderful  region  which  includes  all  forms  of  celestial 
objects.  The  planetary  nebulae  also  show  a  decided  tend- 
ency to  aggregation  along  the  galactic  zone  of  the  heavens. 
Added  to  this  is  the  noteworthy  circumstance  that  all  the 
irregular  gaseous  nebulae  seem  to  cling  around  the  stars 


228  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

forming  certain  very  remarkable  star-groups.  For  example, 
the  Orion  nebula  clings  round  the  group  of  stars  of  which 
the  well-known  set  of  four  called  the  trapezium  is  the 
central  aggregation.  The  Argo  nebula  is  described  by  Sir 
John  Herschel  as  ushered  in  by  a  marvellous  array  of 
stars,  of  which  it  forms  in  a  sense  the  climax.  And  so  of 
all  these  regions  of  irregular  nebulous  matter ;  they  are  all, 
without  exception,  rich  in  stars.  Of  the  association  of 
this  gaseous  matter  with  our  own  star-system  there  can 
be  no  question  whatever. 

And  here  in  passing,  I  may  be  permitted  to  make  a  few 
remarks  on  the  bearing  of  Dr.  Huggins's  noteworthy  dis- 
covery, on  the  famous  nebular  hypotheses  of  Sir  W. 
Herschel  and  Laplace.  These  hypotheses,  (for  they  must 
by  no  means  be  regarded  as  forming  one  and  the  same 
hypothesis,)  were  intended  to  account  on  the  one  hand  for 
the  various  orders  of  objects  seen  in  the  star-depths,  and 
on  the  other  for  the  various  signs  of  a  process  of  growth 
or  development  in  the  Solar  System.  Herschel  sought  to 
shew  how  irregular  nebulous  masses  might  develop  into 
solar  systems.  Laplace  endeavoured  to  prove  that  our 
Solar  System  has  been  developed  from  rotating  nebulous 
masses. 

That  the  reasoning  of  Sir  W.  Herschel  as  to  the  really 
nebulous  character  of  many  of  the  cloud-like  objects  he 
observed  has  been  abundantly  confirmed  and  justified  by 
Dr.  Huggins's  discovery,  cannot  reasonably  be  questioned. 
It  needs  but  a  careful  comparison  of  Herschel's  remarks 
with  Dr  Huggins's  account  of  his  own  discoveries,  to  see 


The  Star-Depths.  229 

that  in  this  case,  as  in  so  many  other  instances,  Sir  W. 
Herschel  rightly  analysed  what  his  telescopes  had  revealed 
But  when  we  pass  from  Herschel's  interpretation  of 
what  he  actually  saw,  to  his  speculations  respecting  the 
unknown — to  his  views,  in  fact,  respecting  the  past  history 
of  the  objects  revealed  to  him — we  do  not  find  any  fresh 
reasons  in  Dr.  Huggins's  discovery  for  accepting,  or  at 
least  insisting  upon,  the  nebular  origin  of  suns.  We 
have  vast  gaseous  masses  intermingled  with  and  surround- 
ing groups  of  stars,  and  apparently  spread  with  exceptional 
richness  \vhere  these  stars  or  suns  are  most  densely  aggre- 
gated. But  this  is  not  what  we  should  expect  to  find  if 
stars  were  formed  out  of  this  gaseous  matter.  On  the 
contrary,  we  should  expect  that  where  stars  were  most 
numerous,  there  the  nebulous  matter  would  have  been 
most  completely  used  up,  so  .to  speak — exhausted,  as  it 
were,  in  the  work  of  star-making.  Nor  again  can  we  re- 
cognize in  the  substances  which  appear  to  constitute  the 
gaseous  nebulae  the  fitting  materials  for  making  stars.  So 
far  as  the  spectroscopic  analysis  of  the  gaseous  nebulae 
extends,  their  chief  constituent  would  appear  to  be  the  gas 
nitrogen,  the  element  next  in  importance  in  their  con- 
stitution being  the  gas  hydrogen,  while  a  third  element, 
as  yet  not  identified,  seems  to  be  present  in  their  sub- 
stance, T  would  not  insist  too  much  on  this  evidence ; 
but  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  it  is  all  the  evidence 
we  have :  and  it  must  be  regarded  as  at  least  an  unsatis- 
factory basis  on  which  to  rear  the  hypothetical  develop- 
ment of  suns  like  our  own,  in  whose  orb  exist  the  glowing 
vapours  of  iron,  copper,  and  zinc,  sodium,  antimony,  and 


230  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

mercury,  barium,  carbon,  silicon,  and  sulphur,  and  probably 
every  single  element  known  to  our  chemists. 

As  respects  the  nebular  hypothesis  of  Laplace,  Dr. 
Huggins's  discovery  must  be  regarded  as  wholly  silent. 
In  the  mere  existence  of  vast  masses  of  glowing  gas,  we 
have  no  evidence  whatever  of  those  regularly  rotating 
spheroids  of  vapour  which  Laplace's  hypothesis  requires 
as  the  primal  forms  of  stars  or  suns. 

These  objections  are  not  urged  because  of  the  special 
difficulties  which  have  been  recognised  by  some  in  the 
bearing  of  the  nebular  hypotheses  on  religious  questions. 
It  has  indeed  always  seemed  to  me  a  circumstance  to  be 
regretted,  that  religious  questions  should  have  been  in  any 
way  associated  with  the  scientific  difficulties  involved  in 
this  particular  question.  There  is  always  this  objection  to 
such  associations,  that  in  forming  them  we  are  apt  to 
associate  scientific  errors  with  religious  teachings ;  and 
these  truths  seem  to  suffer  when  the  scientific  errors  are 
exposed.  Thus  well-meaning  men  have  again  and  again 
injured  the  cause  they  were  most  eager  to  serve,  by  calling 
in  to  its  aid  unsuitable  allies.  But  although  I  can  see  no 
religious  reasons  for  casting  discredit  on  the  theory  that 
processes  have  gone  on  and  are  going  on  upon  an  infinitely 
vast  scale,  resembling  those  which  we  see  daily  going  on 
around  us  upon  a  finite  scale,  yet  it  does  appear  to  me 
that  there  are  many  excellent  scientific  reasons  for  doubt- 
ing very  gravely  whether  all  the  suns  which  people  space 
were  originally  formed  from  masses  of  glowing  gas. 

To  return,  however,  to  the  wonders  of  the  star-depths. 


The  Star-Depths.  231 

Hitherto  I  have  considered  only  the  various  forms  of 
matter  which  occupy  surrounding  space.  Stars  and  star- 
systems,  star-clusters  and  star-aggregations,  star-cloudlets 
and  star-mist — all  these,  and  probably  yet  other  forms  of 
matter,  spread  throughout  the  immeasurable  depths  which 
surround  us  on  all  sides — form  a  scene  altogether  amazing 
in  splendour  and  sublimity.  But  how  infinitely  are  the 
wonders  of  this  scene  enhanced,  when  we  recognize  in 
every  part  of  its  extent  the  existence  of  the  most  stupend- 
ous vitality ! 

In  the  first  place,  we  know  that  those  wonderful  pro- 
cesses, taking  place,  as  recent  discoveries  shew,  in  the 
central  orb  of  our  system,  must  have  their  analogues  in 
the  economy  of  every  star  of  the  universe.  Not  one  star, 
indeed,  may  resemble  our  sun  very  closely  in  details  ;  but 
in  general  respects,  every  self-luminous  orb  in  the  universe 
must  be,  like  the  Sun,  the  scene  of  the  most  amazing 
activity.  For  no  otherwise  can  the  continuance  of  their 
intense  luminosity  be  maintained.  We  have,  indeed,  in 
the  case  of  many  stars,  direct  proof  of  a  degree  of  activity 
far  exceeding  even  that  recognized  in  the  case  of  our  own 
sun.  For  many  stars  vary  in  lustre  to  an  extent  so 
remarkable  as  to  be  scarcely  comparable  with  those  minute 
changes  of  lustre  which  our  sun  undergoes  as  his  spots 
alternately  wax  and  wane  in  number  and  extent ;  while 
one  or  two — as  the  star  Mira  in  the  Whale,  and  the  star 
Eta  in  the  Ship — undergo  changes  so  remarkable,  that  it 
is  almost  impossible  to  conceive  that  these  orbs  can  be  the 
centres  of  schemes  of  inhabited  worlds. 


232  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

The  motions  taking  place  within,  the  star-system  are 
also  altogether  amazing  when  rightly  apprehended.  Con- 
templating the  stars  on  a  still  night,  the  idea  of  infinite 
repose  is  suggested  by  their  serenity  of  aspect.  Judging 
the  stars  again  ty  the  ordinary  te*ts  of  motion,  the 
astronomers  of  old  had  abundant  reason  to  regard  them 
as  the  very  emblems  of  fixity.  But  in  the  light  of  modern 
astronomical  research,  we  have  this  lesson  forced  upon  us, 
that  every  one  of  these  bright  orbs,  and  all  the  millions 
that  are  unseen  save  by  telescopically  strengthened  vision, 
are  urging  their  way  so  swiftly  through  space,  that  the 
most  rapid  motions  familiar  to  us  must  be  regarded  as 
absolute  rest  by  comparison.  "We  know  with  what 
startling  rapidity  an  express  train  rushes  past  a  quiet 
country  station.  In  its  swift  motion  and  heavy  mass,  it 
seems  the  embodiment  of  might  and  energy.  Yet  the 
swiftest  express  train  moves  but  at  the  rate  of  about  one 
mile  in  a  minute  of  time,  and  its  bulk  is  utterly  insignifi- 
cant compared  with  that  of  the  smallest  member  of  the 
Solar  System.  What  inconceivable  energy  must  we 
recognize,  then,  in  the  motion  of  our  sun  through 
space,  at  a  rate  of  hundreds  of  miles  per  minute,  the 
whole  of  his  attendant  family  (each  member  of  which  is 
travelling  rapidly  around  him)  accompanying  him  in  his 
swift  rush  through  the  interstellar  depths  ?  Yet  even  this 
wonderful  energy  of  motion  seems  little  when  compared 
with  the  flight  of  Sirius,  an  orb  a  thousand  times  larger 
than  the  Sun,  and  travelling  many  times  more  swiftly. 
And  we  have  abundant  reasons  for  believing  that  amongst 


The  Star- Depths.  233 

the  stars  revealed  by  powerful  telescopes  there  are  thou- 
sands as  large  as  Sirius,  and  millions  as  large  as  our  Sun  — 
all  with  their  attendant  systems  speeding  with  inconceiv- 
able rapidity  on  their  several  courses ! 

I  would  ask,  in  conclusion,  whether  we  have  now  better 
reason  than  the  astronomers  had  of  old  time  to  consider 
the  mysteries  of  the  universe  as  fully  revealed  to  us  and 
interpreted.  We  know  much  that  was  unknown  until  of 
late,  and  we  have  been  able  to  understand  some  matters 
which  once  seemed  inexplicable ;  but  the  star-depths,  as  we 
see  them  now,  are  even  more  mysterious,  as  well  as  far 
more  wonderful,  than  as  displayed  to  the  astronomers 
of  old. 


STAR   GAUG1NC4. 

THE  account  of  Sir  W.  Herschel's  labours  and  views 
presented  iu  our  text-books  of  astronomy,  is  unfortunately 
so  inexact,  that  the  title  itself  of  this  paper  will  appear 
strange  to  many  readers.  We  not  only  hear  nothing  about 
Sir  W.  Herschel's  employment  of  two  different  methods  of 
star-gauging  in  such  treatises,  but  we  actually  find  neither 
of  his  methods  presented  correctly,  inasmuch  as  the  pro- 
perties of  the  two  methods  are  assigned  to  a  single  nonde- 
script method,  the  incongruities  thus  arising  being 
apparently  altogether  overlooked.  It  is  partly  with  the 
hope  of  rendering  better  justice  to  the  greatest  of  observa- 
tional astronomers  than  has  heretofore  been  accorded  to 
him,  that  I  now  write,  but  partly  and  chiefly  in  order  to 
prepare  the  way  for  submitting  to  the  notice  of  students 
of  the  heavens  a  method  of  research  which  promises  to 
throw  light  on  the  noblest  but  most  difficult  of  all  the 
problems  of  astronomy,  the  determination  of  the  laws 
according  to  which  the  sidereal  universe  has  been  con- 
structed. It  was  this  problem  which  Sir  W.  Herschel 
regarded  as  the  end  and  aim  of  all  his  astronomical  re- 
searches, even  of  those  which  seemed  to  bear  little  upon  it. 
He  observed  other  objects  for  practice  and  to  test  his  tele- 
scopes,— the  stars  alone  he  studied  as  the  final  aim  of  his 


Star-Gauging.  235 

researches,  — "A  knowledge  of  the  construction  of  the 
heavens,"  he  wrote  in  1811,  after  more  than  a  quarter  of 
a  century  of  stellar  study,  "  has  always  been  the  ultimate 
object  of  my  observations." 

I  cannot  but  express  some  degree  of  surprise  at  the  fate 
which  has  befallen  the  noble  series  of  papers  in  which  Sir 
W.  Herschel  presented  his  researches  to  the  world.  As  I 
have  elsewhere  pointed  out,  little  "  has  hitherto  been  done 
to  bring  the  records  of  his  labours  properly  before  the 
student  of  astronomy.  His  papers,  merely  collected  into 
a  volume,  would  form  a  most  important  addition  to 
astronomical  literature ;  but,  if  suitably  edited,  and 
illustrated  by  the  work  of  his  son,  and  of  others  who  have 
succeeded  him  in  his  own  field  of  work,  the  volume  would 
do  more  to  advance  the  study  of  sidereal  astronomy  than 
any  work  which  has  been  published  during  the  last 
century."  With  very  few  exceptions,  what  has  hitherto 
been  done  in  making  Herschel's  words  and  work  public, 
has  been  an  injustice  to  his  memory.  It  seems  to  have 
been  supposed  that  his  papers  could  be  treated  as  we 
might  treat  such  a  work  as  Sir  J.  Herschel's  "  Outlines  of 
Astronomy  ;"  that  extracts  might  be  made  from  any  part 
of  any  paper  without  reference  to  the  position  which  the 
paper  chanced  to  occupy  in  the  complete  series.  Nay, 
it  seems  to  have  been  thought  a  tribute  of  respect  to  his 
memory  thus  to  quote  his  words  without  question  or 
debate.  The  idea  does  not  seem  to  have  occurred  to  any 
one  (with  the  solitary  exception  of  Wilhelm  Struve),  that 

it  is  but  an  ill  compliment  to  the  great  astronomer  to 
11 


236  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

assume  that  he  laboured  from  1784  to  1818  upon  a  subject 
scarcely  touched  before  his  day,  without  making  any  such 
progression  towards  new  knowledge  that  his  earlier  views 
had  to  be  corrected  in  the  light  of  later  researches.  It 
seems  to  have  mattered  little  that  he  himself  in  so  many 
words  expressed  the  fact  that  his  views  had  altered :  he 
had  said  such  and  such  things  in  1784  and  1785  ;  and  those 
things  the  world  was  bound  to  accept  as  his  teaching, 
whatever  he  might  say  thereafter  to  the  contrary.  And  if 
anyone  should  express  doubts  as  to  those  earlier  views,  and 
should  endeavour  to  strengthen  his  position  by  quoting 
Sir  W.  Herschel  in  1818  against  Sir  \V.  Herschel  when 
thirty-two  years  younger,  it  was  the  fashion  to  denounce 
such  attempts  as  altogether  rash  and  presumptuous.  This 
is  as  though  every  writer  on  astronomy  should  present 
Kepler's  youthful  fancies  about  the  relations  between  the 
regular  solids  and  the  planetary  orbits  as  the  matured 
views  of  that  astronomer,  and  denounce  as  irreverent  any 
attempt  to  suggest  that,  on  the  whole,  the  laws  of  elliptic 
motion  subsequently  discovered  by  him  were  better  worthy 
of  respectful  consideration. 

We  owe,  I  conceive,  to  French  writers  part  of  the 
misconception  which  has  arisen  respecting  Herschel's 
labours.  It  pleased  Arago  to  forsake  in  Herschel's  favour 
the  usual  attitude  of  French  men  of  science  with  respect 
to  foreigners.  He  published  a  work,  purporting  to  be  an 
Analysis  of  Herschel's  Life  and  Labours.  In  this  work 
the  earliest  ideas  of  Sir  W.  Herschel  respecting  the  con- 
stitution of  the  heavens, — the  views  which  he  entertained 


Star-Gauging.  237 

before  he  had  made  any  systematic  observations  whatever, 
— are  presented  with  an  unfortunate  perspicuity.  I  refer 
to  Herschel's  paper  of  1784,  about  which  I  shall  presently 
have  to  speak  more  at  length.  It  is  here  we  find  the  first 
enunciation  of  the  famous  grindstone  theory  of  the 
universe,  at  least  the  first  remarks  of  Sir  W.  Herschel  on 
that  theory,  for  it  is  to  Wright  of  Durham  that  the  first 
enunciation  of  the  theory  is  really  due.  This  theory 
Arago  presents,  making  use  of  the  relations  which  in  1784 
Sir  W.  Herschel  expected  to  find.  At  p.  456  Arago  says, 
"  the  galactic  system  is  a  hundred  times  more  extended  in 
one  direction  than  in  another,"  and  he  then  refers  to  a 
picture  of  a  certain  solid  figure  illustrating  Herschel's  ideas 
in  1784  respecting  the  shape  of  our  system.  But  as 
\Vilhelm  Struve  justly  remarks,  the  only  section  based  on 
Herschel's  observation  (presented  in  the  paper  of  1785) 
shows  the  greatest  extension  as  exceeding  the  least  not  in 
the  proportion  of  100  to  1,  but  only  as  5 \  to  1 ;  while  the 
solid  figure  pictured  in  1784  did  not  in  any  way  relate 
to  observations  made  by  Herschel.  It  is  not  too  much  to 
say  that  Arago  probably  limited  his  real  study  of  Herschel's 
papers  to  the  paper  of  1784,  dipping  into  the  others  to 
gather  thence  the  more  striking  passages,  in  full  confidence 
that  they  accorded  well  with  the  views  enunciated  in  1784, 
and  consequently  without  any  attempt  to  understand  the 
gradual  progression  of  Herschel's  ideas  respecting  the 
universe. 

The  effect  of  this  has  been  disastrous.     All  the  French 
writers  and  most  of  the  continental  writers, — Guillemin, 


238  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

Flammarion,  and  the  rest, — follow  Arago  unhesitatingly. 
Too  many  of  our  English  writers  of  text-books  have 
borrowed  directly  from  French  authors.  A  few  others 
have  presented  original  analyses  of  Herschel's  papers,  but 
still  such  analyses  have  only  been  sound  for  the  earlier 
papers  (1784  and  1785),  while  the  blending  of  matter 
taken  from  later  papers  introduces  the  same  real  confusion 
of  ideas  as  in  Arago's  work,  though  not  always  accompanied 
with  the  same  unfortunate  perspicuity  of  statement. 

Passing  over  such  occasional  reference  to  Sir  W. 
Herschel's  labours  as  we  find  in  the  pages  of  writers  of  a 
higher  order  than  those  just  mentioned,  it  may  be  said 
that  the  elder  Struve  alone,  of  all  astronomers  who  have 
dealt  with  Herschel's  papers,  clearly  recognized  the  change 
which  took  place  in  the  great  astronomer's  views  as  his 
labours  proceeded.  We  owe  this,  I  believe,  to  the 
fortunate  chance  which  led  Struve  to  go  over  a  second 
time,  with  close  attention,  the  series  of  papers  which  he 
had  probably  before  read  once  through  (no  astronomer 
would  be  worthy  of  the  name  who  had  not  done  so),  but 
without  a  careful  consideration  of  the  bearing  of  the  several 
papers  on  Sir  W.  Herschel's  progressive  researches.  While 
on  a  visit  to  England  he  received  from  Sir  J.  Herschel  a 
volume  containing  not  only  the  complete  series  of  the 
elder  Herschel's  papers,  but  many  valuable  manuscript 
notes  by  the  gieat  astronomer.  Struve  had  already 
carried  out  a  series  of  researches  into  the  laws  of  stellar 
distribution ;  and  he  was  under  the  impression  that  his 
results  were  opposed  to  those  which  Sir  W.  Herschel  had 


Star-Gauging.  239 

obtained.  On  carefully  re-reading  Herschel's  papers, 
however,  he  found  that  his  own  results  were  in  agreement 
with  those  to  which  Herschel  had  been  led  during  the 
later  portion  of  his  observing  career.  In  fact,  Struve  had 
overlooked,  as  I  believe  every  first  reader  of  Herschel's 
papers  invariably  does  overlook,  the  fact  that  Herschel 
not  only  adopted  new  views  of  the  heavens  as  his  labours 
proceeded,  but  abandoned  the  very  principles  which  he 
had  taken  for  his  guidance  in  the  earlier  part  of  his  career. 
It  was  the  merest  accident  that  Struve,  already  engaged 
in  the  careful  study  of  stellar  distribution,  received  the 
interesting  present  just  mentioned,  which  led  to  the 
re-examination  of  the  great  master's  papers  on  the  heavens. 
Yet  Struve,  a  skilful  astronomer,  an  excellent  mathe- 
matician, a  laborious  student,  and  doubtless  a  careful 
reader,  might  fairly  have  been  expected  to  derive  correct 
impressions  from  his  first  reading  of  those  papers.  The 
fact  that  he  did  not,  that  by  his  own  account  the  second 
reading  almost  reversed  the  ideas  he  had  derived  from  the 
first,  renders  less  surprising  the  fact  (for  such  it  is)  that 
men  like  Nichol,  Grant,  and  even  Sir  John  Herschel, 
among  those  who  have  published  their  impressions,  and 
others  of  the  utmost  eminence  in  astronomy  who  have 
not  done  so,  have  entertained  altogether  erroneous 
ideas  respecting  the  relations  which  exist  between  the 
earlier  and  the  later  views  of  Sir  William  Herschel. 
There  are  many  who  have  read  every  paper  by  the  elder 
Herschel  on  the  constitution  of  the  heavens,  who  would 
be  quite  unable  to  explain  by  what  steps  he  was  led  to 


240  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

abandon  the  principles  on  which  he  based  his  first  method 
of  star-gauging,  in  favour  of  those  which  formed  the  basis 
of  his  second  method.  Nay,  I  happen  to  know  that  not 
a  few  of  those  who  have  read  Herschel's  papers  have  not 
recognized  the  distinction  between  the  two  methods,  even 
if  they  are  aware  that  Herschel  ever  employed  more  than 
one  mode  of  star-gauging. 

For  my  own  part,  I  have  not  found  five  successive 
readings  of  Herschel's  series  of  papers,  and  the  analysis  of 
some  passages,  as  carefully  as  one  analyses  the  most  con- 
centrated portions  of  a  process  of  mathematical  reading, 
to  be  one  whit  more  than  the  proper  mastery  of  Herschel's 
papers  require.  They  are  not,  by  any  means,  easy  to 
understand.  Sir  W.  Herschel  was  seldom  at  the  pains  to 
indicate  that  he  had  changed  his  views,  being,  for  the  most 
part,  satisfied  with  presenting  his  newly-adopted  opinions 
without  any  special  reference  to  those  he  had  before 
entertained.  Where  he  did  refer  to  any  change  of  opinion, 
he  did  not  enter  into  details,  but  simply  noted  that  the 
views  he  had  formerly  entertained  had  given  place  to 
others,  the  results  of  a  more  complete  acquaintance  with 
the  facts.  Nor  was  Sir  W.  Herschel  a  particularly  lucid 
writer ;  we  shall  see,  as  we  proceed,  that  at  times,  in  order 
to  understand  his  meaning,  we  have  to  examine  the 
context  more  carefully  than  is  usually  necessary  in 
scientific  or  explanatory  writing. 

In  1774,  Herschel  enunciated  his  general  views  respect- 
ing the  sidereal  system,  and  the  method  which  seemed  to 
him,  at  that  time,  the  best  for  attempting  to  ascertain  the 


Star-Gauging.  241 

true  figure  of  the  system.  This,  his  first  method  oj 
star-gauging,  has  been  described,  though  not  with  strict 
accuracy,  in  most  of  our  text-books  of  astronomy.  If  we 
suppose  that  our  siin  is  a  member  of  a  system  of  suns 
scattered  with  a  certain  general  uniformity  throughout  a 
region  of  space  having  a  certain  well-defined  figure,  then 
a  method  exists  by  which  it  is  possible  to  determine  that 
figure,  provided  only  that  a  telescope  can  be  constructed 
which  is  powerful  enough  to  reach  to  the  limits  of  the 
system  in  all  directions.  For  manifestly  the  farther  the 
system  extends  in  any  given  direction,  the  greater  will  be 
the  number  of  stars  lying  towards  that  direction  (since 
we  have  supposed  a  certain  general  uniformity  of  dis- 
tribution) ;  so  that  if  we  use  the  same  telescope  with 
unchanged  "  power,"  and  direct  it  in  turn  to  every  part  of 
the  heavens,  then,  by  counting  the  number  of  stars  brought 
into  view  in  these  different  directions,  we  can  determine 
the  relative  extension  of  the  system  along  those  directions 
—in  other  words,  we  can  determine  the  shape  of  the 
system. 

This  is  the  famous  method  of  gauging  the  heavens.  I 
give  another  description  of  it  (borrowed  from  the  pages 
of  that  fine  work,  Grant's  history  of  "  Physical  Astro- 
nomy"), because  the  method  should  be  very  carefully 
considered  by  the  reader.  Grant  speaks  of  the  plan  as  a 
"  remarkable  method,  devised  by  Herschel  for  ascertaining 
the  configuration  in  space  of  this  great  sidereal  system,  by 
examining  the  heavens  at  different  distances  from  the 
Galactic  Circle,  and  numbering  the  stars  visible  in  the 


242  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

field  of  view  of  his  telescope.  Assuming  that  the  stars 
are  uniformly  distributed  throughout  space,  and  that  the 
telescope  suffices  to  penetrate  to  the  utmost  limits  of  the 
sidereal  stratum  constituting  the  Milky  Way,  it  is  mani- 
fest that  the  number  of  stars  visible  in  the  field  of  view  of 
the  telescope  would  increase  with  the  length  of  the  visual 
line,  and  would  thereby  afford  an  indication  of  the  distance 
from  the  observer  to  the  exterior  surface  of  the  Milky 
Way.  Hence,  by  comparing  together  the  lengths  of  the 
various  lines  formed  in  this  manner,  and  taking  into 
consideration  their  respective  distances  from  the  Galactic 
Circle,  the  actual  configuration  in  space  of  the  Milky  Way 
may  be  ascertained.  Such  is  a  brief  outline  of  the  cele- 
brated method  of  gauging  the  heavens,  which  Herschel 
practised  to  a  vast  extent  in  tlie  early  period  of  his  re- 
searches on  the  constitution  of  the  Milky  Way."  Here 
the  italics  are  mine.  I  invite  special  attention  to  Grant's 
recognition  of  a  change  in  Herschel's  methods  of  research 
towards  the  latter  part  of  his  career  as  an  observer.  It  is 
remarkable  that,  notwithstanding  this,  Grant  failed  to 
notice  how  and  in  what  respects  Herschel  modified  the 
views  to  which  his  earlier  method  of  star-gauging  had  led 
him. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  this  plan  of  star-gauging  con- 
sisted essentially  in  applying  one  and  the  same  telescopic 
power  to  different  parts  of  the  heavens.  It  involved  the 
assumption  of  a  general  uniformity  of  stellar  distribution 
within  the  limits  of  our  system.  And  it  required  that  the 
telescope  should  penetrate  to  these  limits, — at  least,  if  in 


Star-Gauging.  243 

any  part  of  the  heavens  this  was  not  the  case,  the  shape  of 
the  system  towards  that  part  could  not  be  determined. 

It  is  necessary  to  notice,  however,  that  the  general 
uniformity  of  distribution  by  no  means  implied  the 
non-existence  of  clustering  aggregations  of  stars,  or  of 
streams,  branches,  and  nodules  of  stars  within  the  limits 
of  the  system.  On  the  contrary,  Herschel,  so  early  as 
1785,  clearly  indicated  his  recognition  of  such  varieties ; 
and  all  that  he  insisted  upon  at  that  time  was  that  such 
peculiarities  were  themselves  so  distributed  as  to  produce 
within  the  system,  regarded  as  a  whole,  a  general  uni- 
formity of  distribution. 

Tt  is  absolutely  essential,  if  we  would  understand 
Herschel's  earlier  views,  to  take  his  own  preliminary 
description,  which  somehow  appears  to  have  escaped  the 
notice  of  commentators, — unless  we  suppose  the  difficulty 
of  grasping  Herschel's  real  meaning  to  have  caused  them 
to  misunderstand  the  passage. 

"  It  will  be  best,"  Herschel  says,  "  to  take  the  subject 
from  a  point  of  view  at  a  considerable  distance,  both  of 
space  and  of  time.  Let  us  suppose,  then,  numberless 
stars  of  various  sizes  scattered  over  an  indefinite  portion  of 
space  in  such  a  manner  as  to  be  almost  equally  distributed 
throughout  the  whole.  The  laws  of  attraction,  which  no 
doubt  extend  to  the  remotest  region  of  the  fixed  stars, 
will  operate  in  such  a  manner  as  most  probably  to  produce 
the  following  remarkable  effects  " : — 

"  Form  I.  In  the  first  place,  since  we  have  supposed 
the  stars  to  be  of  various  sizes,  it  will  frequently  happen 


244  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

that  a  star  being  considerably  larger  than  its  neighbouring 
ones,  will  attract  them  more  than  they  will  be  attracted  by 
others  that  are  immediately  around  them ;  by  which 
means  they  will  be,  in  turn,  as  it  were,  condensed  about 
the  centre  ;  or,  in  other  words,  form  themselves  into  a 
cluster  of  stars  of  almost  a  globular  figure,  more  or  less 
regularly  so,  according  to  the  size  and  original  distance  of 
the  surrounding  stars." 

"  Form  II.  The  next  case,  which  will  also  happen 
almost  as  frequently  as  the  former,  is  where  a  few  stars 
though  not  superior  in  size  to  the  rest,  may  chance  to  be 
rather  nearer  each  other  than  the  surrounding  ones  ;  for 
here  also  will  be  found  a  prevailing  attraction  in  the 
combined  centre  of  gravity  of  them  all,  which  will 
occasion  the  neighbouring  stars  to  draw  together,  not, 
indeed,  so  as  'to  form  a  regular,  or  globular  figure,  but, 
however,  in  such  a  manner,  as  to  be  condensed  towards  the 
common  centre  of  gravity  of  the  whole  irregular  cluster. 
And  this  construction  admits  of  the  utmost  variety  of 
shapes,  according  to  the  number  and  situation  of  the  stars 
which  first  give  rise  to  the  condensation  of  the  rest." 

"  Form  III.  From  the  composition  and  repeated  con- 
junction of  both  the  foregoing  forms,  a  third  may  be 
derived,*  when  many  large  stars,  or  combined  small  ones 
are  situated  in  long-extended,  regular,  or  crooked  rows, 
hooks,  or  branches ;  for  they  will  also  draw  the  surrounding 

*  Here  the  words  "  may  be  derived  "  are  not  intended  to  imply  doubt 
as  to  the  fact  that  the  groups  of  the  third  form  exist.  The  context 
shows  that  Herschel  means  that  we  may  deduce  the  existence  of  the 


Star-Gauging.  245 

ones,  so  as  to  produce  figures  of  condensed  stars,  coarsely 
similar  to  the  former,  which  gave  rise  to  these  con- 
densations." 

"Form  IY.  We  may  likewise  admit  of  still  more 
extensive  combinations  when,  at  the  same  time  that  a 
cluster  of  stars  is  forming  in  one  part  of  space,  there  may  be 
another  collecting  in  a  different,  but  perhaps  not  far  distant 
quarter,  which  may  occasion  a  mutual  approach  towards 
their  common  centre  of  gravity." 

"  Form  V.  In  the  last  place,  as  a  natural  consequence 
of  the  former  cases,  there  will  be  formed  great  cavities,  or 
vacancies,  by  the  retreat  of  the  stars  towards  the  various 
centres  which  attract  them  ;  so  that  upon  the  whole,  there 
is  evidently  a  field  of  the  greatest  variety  for  the  mutual 
and  combined  attractions  of  the  heavenly  bodies  to  exert 
themselves  in." 

After  considering  the  possibility  of  catastrophes  during 
the  evolution  of  the  forms  here  described,  Herschel  pro- 
ceeds to  consider  the  position  of  the  terrestrial  observer  in 
his  "  own  retired  station,  in  one  of  the  planets  attending 
a  star."  He  shows  that  to  such  an  observer,  placed  in  a 
far  extending  stratum  "  or  branching  cluster  of  millions  of 
stars,  such  as  may  fall  under  Form  III.,"  considered  above, 
the  following  appearances  will  be  presented : — To  the 
naked  eye,  "  The  heavens  will  not  only  be  richly  scattered 

third  form  from  considering  that  both  the  other  forms  must  be  com- 
pounded and  repeatedly  conjoined.  It  is  important  to  notice  this, 
because  "  Form  III."  is  the  key  of  the  whole  passage,  being  the  form 
which  Herschel  attributed  to  our  Milky  Way  at  this  stage  of  his 
researches. 


246  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

over  with  brilliant  constellations,  but  a  sliming  zone  or 
Milky  Way  will  be  perceived  to  surround  the  whole  sphere 
of  the  heavens,  owing  to  the  combined  light  of  those  stars 
which  are  too  small,  that  is  too  remote,  to  be  seen." 
Let  this  passage  be  particularly  noted  before  we  proceed, 
as  on  its  right  comprehension  depends  our  entire  judgment 
as  to  Herschel's  earlier  views.  He  here  presents  the  sidereal 
system  as  a  far-extending  stratum  or  branching  cluster  of 
millions  of  stars,  of  Form  III.,  and  therefore  including 
within  its  limits  many  subordinate  clusters  and  nebulae  of 
Forms  I.  and  II.  ;  while  he  regards  the  light  of  the  Milky 
Way  as  resulting  from  the  extension  of  the  system  towards 
that  zone  much  farther  than  in  other  directions.*  This  must 
be  borne  carefully  in  mind  in  reading  what  immediately 
follows.  "  Our  observer's  sight,"  proceeds  Herschel, 
"  will  be  so  confined  that  he  will  imagine  this  single 
collection  of  stars,  of  which  he  does  not  even  perceive  the 
thousandth  part,  to  be  the  whole  contents  of  the  heavens. 
Allowing  him  now  the  use  of  a  common  telescope  he 
begins  to  suspect  that  all  the  milkiness  of  the  bright  path 
which  surrounds  the  sphere  may  be  owing  to  stars.  He 
perceives  a  few  clusters  of  them  in  various  parts  of  the 
heavens,  and  finds  also  that  there  are  a  kind  of  nebulous 
patches  ;  but  still  his  views  are  not  extended  so  far  as  to 

*  In  fact,  his  views  at  this  stage  corresponded  closely  with  those 
which  had  been  advanced  by  Lambert  nearly  a  quarter  of  a  century 
earlier.  In  the  papers  of  1784,  Herschel  presents  views  more  nearly 
resembling  those  which  Wright  of  Durham  had  advanced  half  a 
century  earlier,  and  which  Kant  adopted  a  year  or  two  before  Lambert 
advanced  his  more  correct  views. 


Star-Gauging.  247 

reach  to  the  end  of  the  stratum  in  which  he  is  situated,  so 
that  he  looks  upon  these  patches  as  belonging  to  that 
system  which  to  him  seems  to  comprehend  every  celestial 
object.  He  now  increases  his  power  of  vision,  and  apply- 
ing himself  to  a  close  observation,  finds  the  Milky  "Way  is 
indeed  no  other  than  a  collection  of  very  small  stars.  He 
perceives  that  those  objects  which  had  been  called  nebulae 
are  evidently  nothing  but  clusters  of  stars.  He  finds  their 
number  increase  upon  him,  and  when  he  resolves  one 
nebula  into  stars  he  discovers  ten  new  ones  which  he  can- 
not resolve.  He  then  forms  the  idea  of  immense  strata  of 
fixed  stars,  of  clusters  of  stars,  and  of  nebulas,  till  going 
on  with  such  interesting  observations  he  now  perceives 
that  all  these  appearances  must  naturally  arise  from  the 
confined  situation  in  which  he  is  now  placed.  Confined, 
it  may  justly  be  called,  though  in  no  less  a  space  than 
what  before  appeared  the  whole  region  of  the  fixed  stars ; 
but  which  now  has  assumed  the  shape  of  a  crookedly 
branching  nebula,  not  one  of  the  least,  but  perhaps  very  far 
from  being  the  most  considerable  of  those  numberless 
clusters  that  enter  into  the  construction  of  the  heavens." 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  the  passage  just  quoted  is  not 
very  easy  to  understand.  At  one  stage,  or  rather  through- 
out the  greater  part  of  the  passage,  it  seems  abundantly 
clear  that  Herschel  is  describing  our  sidereal  system  as 
including  multitudes  of  subordinate  clusters  and  nebulae. 
But  then  at  the  end,  he  describes  it  as  itself  a  nebula, 
greater  than  some,  but  less  than  others,  of  numberless 
clusters,  composing  the  sidereal  heavens.  And  the  per- 


248  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

plexity  which  the  passage  as  a  whole  thus  occasions,  is 
accompanied  by  a  perplexity  arising  from  the  variety  of 
meaning  which  may  be  attributed  to  the  different  sentences. 
For  instance,  where  he  says  that  the  observer  "  forms  the 
idea  of  immense  strata  of  fixed  stars,  of  clusters,  and  of 
nebulae,"  he  might  (so  far  as  the  grammatical  interpreta- 
tion of  the  sentence  is  concerned)  mean  either  (1)  the  idea 
of  immense  strata,  composed  of  fixed  stars,  clusters,  and 
nebulae,  or  (2)  the  idea  of  immense  stellar  strata,  star- 
clusters,  and  nebulaa.  The  latter  has  been  the  meaning 
usually  adopted — if,  at  least,  this  particular  sentence  has 
been  discussed  at  all  Such  a  meaning  accords  with  the 
theory  (the  familiar  Grindstone  Theory)  commonly  at- 
tributed to  Herschel.  Nevertheless  it  should  be  manifest, 
from  the  passage  just  quoted  (regarded  as  a  whole),  that 
Herschel  not  only  recognized  star-strata,  including  within 
their  limits  subordinate  clusters  and  nebulas,  but  that  he 
regarded  our  sidereal  system  as  a  star-stratum  of  that  kind. 
How,  then,  are  we  to  remove  the  difficulties  I  have  noted 
in  the  passage  as  a  whole,  and  in  its  several  parts  ?  It 
must  certainly  be  by  taking  a  meaning  which  covers  both 
the  two  views  which  appear  contradictory,  for  no  one  will 
for  a  moment  admit  that  Sir  W.  Herschel  really  held  con- 
tradictory views.  Accordingly,  we  must  believe  both  that 
Herschel  held  our  galaxy  to  be  a  stratum,  including  in  its 
limits  star -clusters  and  nebulae,  and  that  he  regarded  it  as 
one  among  many  systems  of  its  own  order,  that  is,  one 
among  many  star-clusters  and  nebulae,  and  of  a  higher 
order  than  those  (spoken  of  under  the  same  name ;  but 


Star-  Gauging.  249 

really)  subordinate  to,  and  included  within,  itself  and  its 
fellow  systems.* 

That  this  is  Herschel's  meaning  we  perceive  clearly 
from  a  passage  following  almost  immediately  after  the  one 
just  quoted.  "It  will  appear,"  he  says,  "that  many 
hundreds  of  nebulae,  of  the  first  and  second  forms,  are 
actually  to  be  seen  in  the  heavens,  and  their  places  will 
hereafter  be  pointed  out ;  and  many  of  the  third  form  will 
be  described. "  Thus,  there  can  be  seen  in  the  heavens  many 
hundreds  of  clusters  and  nebulae  of  one  k:nd  (Forms  I.  and 
II),  and  also  many  clusters  of  a  higher  order  (Form  III.), 
within  which  the  others  exist  as  subordinate  parts — or,  in 
other  words,  we  can  see  the  clusters  and  nebulae  which 
form  part  of  the  architecture,  as  it  were,  of  our  own 

*  The  case  is  one  of  those  to  which  I  have  referred  above,  where  we 
have  to  reason  from  the  context  in  order  to  understand  Herschel's  true 
meaning.  And  it  would  be  unfair,  I  think,  to  blame  the  ordinary 
commentator  for  failing  to  apply  such  reasoning  to  Herschel's  volumin- 
ous papers.  What,  however,  does  seem  unfortunate,  is  the  course 
adopted  by  our  text- book  writers,  in  selecting  passages  from  Herschel's 
papers  at  random,  notwithstanding  these  difficulties,  and  stringing 
them  together  as  Herschel's  matured  views.  It  is  as  though  a  person 
not  very  familiar  with  a  language  were  to  pretend  to  analyse  a  book  in 
that  language  by  selecting  from  the  book  all  the  sentences  he  was  able 
to  understand.  I  may  note,  in  passing,  that  the  author  of  one  of  the 
best  treatises  on  observational  astronomy  in  existence,  has  been  led  into 
a  most  curious  misapprehension.  Herschel  had  expressed  a  belief  that 
the  stellar  stratum  extends  one  hundred  times  farther  in  the  direction 
of  its  general  level  than  at  right  angles  to  that  level :  but  later  (in  the 
paper  I  am  quoting  from  above)  he  assigned  5J  to  1  as  the  proportion. 
Now  the  late  Admiral  Smyth,  at  p.  310  of  his  "Bedford  Cycle," 
presents  a  picture  of  the  sidereal  system,  showing  that  he  had  com- 
bined these  two  different  results  into  one,  thus  giving  to  our  system 
length,  breadth,  and  thickness  as  1,  54,  and  100. 


250  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

sidereal  system  ;  while  we  can  see,  but  not  in  such  great 
numbers,  external  nebulae  of  the  same  order  in  the  scale 
of  creation  as  our  own  galaxy.  Herschel,  in  fact,  describes 
ten  nebulas  of  the  latter  order,  speaking  of  them  as 
external  Milky  Ways.  Instances  of  the  fourth  order 
"will  be  related,"  he  proceeds;  "a  few  of  the  cavities 
mentioned  in  the  fifth  will  be  particularized,  though  many 
more  have  already  been  observed :  so  that  upon  the  whole, 
I  believe  it  will  be  found  that  the  foregoing  theoretical 
view,  with  all  its  consequential  appearances,  as  seen  by  an 
eye  enclosed  in  one  of  the  nebulse,  is  no  more  than  a 
drawing  from  nature,  wherein  the  features  of  the  original 
have  been  closely  copied ;  and  I  hope  the  resemblance 
will  not  be  called  a  bad  one,  when  it  shall  be  considered 
how  very  limited  must  be  the  pencil  of  an  inhabitant  of 
so  small  and  retired  a  portion  of  an  indefinite  system,  in 
attempting  the  picture  of  so  unbounded  an  extent." 

In  further  confirmation  of  this  interpretation  of 
Herschel's  views  at  this  stage  of  his  labours  I  will  now 
quote  a  passage  which  is  perfectly  irreconcilable,  I  venture 
to  affirm,  with  the  simple  theory  of  the  sidereal  system  so 
commonly  attributed  to  Sir  W.  Herschel. 

"  If,"  he  says,  "  it  were  possible  to  distinguish  between 
the  parts  of  an  indefinitely  extended  whole,  the  nebula  we 
inhabit  might  be  said  to  be  one  that  has  fewer  marks  of 
profound  antiquity  upon  it  than  the  rest  To  explain  this 
idea,  perhaps,  more  clearly,  we  should  recollect  that  the 
condensation  of  clusters  of  stars  has  been  ascribed  to  a 
gradual  approach  ;  and  whoever  reflects  upon  the  number 


Star-  Gauging.  251 

of  ages  that  must  have  passed  before  some  of  the  clusters 
could  be  so  far  condensed  as  we  find  them  at  present,  will 
not  wonder  if  I  ascribe  a  certain  air  of  youth  and  vigour 
to  many  very  regularly  scattered  regions  of  our  sidereal 
stratum.  There  are,  moreover,  many  places  in  the  stratum 
where  there  is  the  greatest  reason  to  believe  that  the  stars, 
if  we  may  judge  from  appearances,  are  now  drawing 
towards  various  secondary  centres,  and  will  in  time 
separate  into  different  clusters  so  as  to  occasion  many 
subdivisions.  Hence  we  may  surmise  that  when  a 
nebulo.us  stratum  consists  chiefly  of  nebulas  of  the  first 
and  second  form,  it  probably  owes  its  origin  to  what  may 
be  called  the  decay  of  a  great  compound  nebula  of  the 
third  form  ;  and  that  the  subdivisions  which  happened  to 
it  in  the  length  of  time  occasioned  all  the  small  nebulae 
which  spring  from  it  to  lie  in  a  certain  range,  according 
as  they  were  detached  from  the  primary  one.  In  like 
manner  our  system,  after  numbers  of  ages,  may  very 
possibly  become  divided  so  as  to  give  rise  to  a  stratum  of 
two  or  three  hundred  nebula  ;  for  it  would  not  be  difficult 
to  point  out  so  many  beginning  or  gathering  clusters  in  it. 
This  view  of  the  subject  throws  a  considerable  light  upon 
the  appearance  of  that  remarkable  collection  of  many 
hundreds  of  nebulas  which  are  to  be  seen  in  what  I  have 
called  the  nebulous  stratum  of  Coma  Berenices.  It 
appears  from  the  extended  and  branching  figure  of  our 
nebula,  that  there  is  room  for  the  decomposed  nebulas  of  a 
large,  reduced,  former  great  one  to  approach  nearer  to  us 
in  the  sides  than  in  other  parts.  Nay,  possibly,  there 


252  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

might  originally  be  another  very  large  joining  branch, 
which  in  time  became  separated  by  the  condensation  of 
the  stars  :  and  this  may  be  the  reason  of  the  little  remain- 
ing breadth  of  our  system  in  that  very  place ;  for  the 
nebulae  of  the  stratum,  of  Coma  are  brightest  and  most 
crowded  just  opposite  our  situation,  or  in  the  pole  of  our 
system.  As  soon  as  this  idea  was  suggested,  I  tried  also 
the  opposite  pole,  where,  accordingly,  I  have  met  with  a 
great  number  of  nebulae,  though  under  a  much  more 
scattered  form." 

I  apprehend  that  this  conception  even  of  the  possi- 
bility that  the  two  great  nebular  systems  lying  (roughly) 
towards  the  galactic  poles,  may  be  the  fragments  of 
branches  formerly  belonging  to  our  own  sidereal  system, 
which  is  itself  tending  towards  a  dissolution  into  such 
fragments,  cannot  in  any  way  be  reconciled  with  "the 
absurd  cloven-grindstone  theory  which  is  advanced  over 
and  over  again  in  our  text-books  as  the  outcome  of  Sir  W. 
Herschel's  labours. 

I  could  quote  several  other  passages  from  the  fine  paper 
of  1785,  in  confirmation  of  the  thesis,  that,  even  at  this 
early  stage,  Sir  W.  Herschel  not  only  recognized  great 
variety  of  structure  within  the  limits  [of  our  sidereal 
system,  but  also  regarded  large  numbers  of  clusters  and 
nebulae  as  forming  parts  of  that  system.  I  will,  however, 
content  myself  with  two  short  passages ;  one  indicating 
his  ideas  respecting  the  relation  between  our  Milky  Way 
and  star-clusters,  the  other  showing  what  orders  of  nebulae 
he  alone  regarded  as  probably  external  systems,  resembling 


Star-Gauging.  253 

our  own  in  extent  and  importance.  "  Some  parts  of  our 
system  seem  indeed,"  he  says,  in  the  former,  "to  have 
already  suffered  greater  ravages  of  time  than  others,  if  this 
way  of  expressing  myself  may  be  allowed.  For  instance, 
in  the  body  of  Scorpio  is  an  opening,  or  hole,  which  is 

probably  owing  to  this  cause This  opening  is  at  least 

four  degrees  broad;  but  its  height  (sic)  I  have  not  yet 
ascertained.  It  is  remarkable  that  the  nebula  80  Messier, 
which  is  one  of  the  richest  and  most  compressed  clusters 
of  small  stars  I  remember  to  have  seen,  is  situated  just  on 
the  western  border  of  it ;  which  would  almost  authorize  a 
suspicion  that  the  stars  of  which  it  is  composed  were 
collected  from  that  place,  and  had  left  the  vacancy. 
What  adds  not  a  little  to  this  surmise  is,  that  the  same 
phenomenon  is  once  more  repeated  with  the  cluster  of 
stars  4-  Messier,  which  is  also  on  the  western  border  of 
another  vacancy,  and  has,  moreover,  a  small  miniature 
cluster,  or  easily  resolvable  nebula  following  it  at  no  very 
great  distance."  The  other  passage  runs  thus  : — "  There 
are  some  very  remarkable  nebulae  which  cannot  well  be 
less,  but  are  probably  much  larger  than  our  system  ;  and 
being  also  extended,  the  inhabitants  of  the  planets  that 
attend  the  stars  which  compose  these  nebulas,  must 
likewise  perceive  the  same  phenomena  ;  for  which  reason 
these  nebulae  may  also  be  called  Milky  Ways'  by  way  of 
distinction." 

It  was  to  a  sidereal  system  which  he  regarded  as  thus 
complex  in  structure  and  in  shape  that  Sir  W.  Herschel 
applied  his  first  method  of  star-gauging.  He  believed 


254  OUT  Place  among  Infinities. 

himself  to  be  gauging,  not,  as  has  been  so  commonly 
supposed,  a  simple  cluster  of  stars  belonging  to  the  same 
order  in  the  scale  01  creation  as  the  clusters  and  nebulae 
discernible  in  the  telescopic  scrutiny  of  the  heavens,  but 
a  great  clustering  aggregation  of  stars,  star-clusters,  and 
nebulae,  belonging  to  the  same  order  as  certain  of  the  more 
remarkable  and  extended  of  the  nebulae. 

In  what  sense,  then,  it  may  be  asked,  did  he  recognize 
general  uniformity  in  the  sidereal  system  ?  And  in  what 
respect  did  his  views  at  this  stage  differ  from  those  which 
he  subsequently  adopted  ? 

It  is  easy  to  reply  to  these  questions,  when  once  the 
scope  of  Herschel's  series  of  researches  has  been  recognized. 
It  is  manifest  that  at  this  early  period  he  regarded  the 
sidereal  system  as  presenting  a  general  uniformity  of 
structure  within  its  irregular  boundary,  such  uniformity 
arising,  not  from  a  general  uniformity  of  stellar  distribution, 
but  from  a  general  uniformity  in  the  distribution  of  the 
stars,  star-clusters,  and  nebulae  within  the  system.  He 
believed,  in  fact,  in  what  may  be  termed  regular  irregu- 
larity ;  and  one  may  present  his  theory  on  this  point  in 
some  such  manner  as  this :  "  If  any  two  very  large 
portions  of  the  sidereal  system  be  compared  with  each 
other,  the  number  of  stars,  star-clusters,  and  nebulae,  in 
these  several  portions,  will  be  proportional  (or  nearly  so) 
to  the  volume  of  those  portions  respectively."  That  this 
was  his  view  is  not  only  clear  from  the  passages  I  have 
cited,  but  is  strikingly  manifested  by  his  applying  to  our 
sidereal  system  the  term  "  Milky  Way,"  as  inclusive  of 


Star-Gauging.  255 

the  whole,  and  his  use  of  the  same  term  for  external 
systems,  all  those  nebulae  which  he  regarded  as  external, 
being  at  this  stage  of  his  labours  called  indifferently 
external  systems,  galaxies,  or  Milky  Ways.  But  he  also, 
even  more  distinctly,  shews  that  he  believed  the  sidereal 
system  to  be  regularly  constituted,  when  regarded  as  a 
whole,  in  the  following  remarkable  passage,  which  presents 
more  clearly  than  any  other  I  have  met  with  his  true 
views  at  this  time  : — "  The  rich  parts  of  the  Milky  Way, 
as  well  as  those  in  the  distant  broad  part  of  the  stratum, 
consist  of  a  mixture  of  stars  of  all  possible  sizes,  that  are 
seemingly  placed  without  any  apparent  order.  Perhaps 
we  might  recollect  that  a  greater  condensation  towards  the 
centre  of  the  system  than  towards  the  borders  of  it  should 
be  taken  into  consideration  ;  but  with  a  nebula  of  the  third 
form,  containing  such  various  and  extensive  combinations 
as  I  have  found  to  take  place  in  ours,  this  circumstance, 
which  in  one  of  the  first  form  would  be  of  considerable 
moment,  may,  I  think,  be  safely  neglected." 

But  Sir  W.  Herschel  by  no  means  regarded  this  view  of 
the  sidereal  system  as  demonstratively  established,  not- 
withstanding the  fact  that  it  was  presented  in  company 
with  the  long  list  of  star-gauges  for  which  he  is  so  justly 
celebrated.  He  knew  perfectly  well,  what  many  of  his 
admirers  have  overlooked,  that  a  hypothesis  cannot  be 
established  by  the  observations  which  it  was  devised  to 
interpret.  He  reasoned  thus : — Granting  the  truth  of  a 
certain  hypothesis,  a  series  of  star-gauges,  described  in  the 
paper  of  1785,  has  a  certain  significance,  and  shews  the 


256  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

sidereal  system  to  have  a  certain  shape  :  if  the  hypothesis 
be  not  true,  they  cannot  be  so  interpreted. 

This  question,  then  (to  be  answered  by  other  observa- 
tions) remained  for  him, — "Is  the  sidereal  system  con- 
stituted as  supposed  in  the  hypothesis  I  have  been 
employing  ?"  If  he  had  overlooked  this  question,  he  would 
not  have  been  HerscheL  No  matter  how  great  his  skill 
as  an  observer,  or  how  numerous  his  observations,  he 
would  not  have  been  entitled  to  a  higher  position  as  a 
reasoner  or  as  an  interpreter  of  observations  than  any  of 
his  predecessors  in  the  discussion  of  the  stellar  system, 
and  not  to  so  high  a  position  as  Wright,  or  Kant,  or 
Lambert,  or  the  ingenious  MichelL  But  he  was  not  thus 
negligent  of  cardinal  considerations.  He  clearly  recognized 
the  weak  point  of  the  theory  he  was  discussing  (rather  than 
advocating).  "2  would  not  be  understood"  he  says, 
(immediately  after  the  words  last  quoted  from  the  paper 
of  1785,)  "  to  lay  a  greater  stress  on  these  calculations  than 
the  principles  on  which  they  are  founded  will  permit;  and  if, 
hereafter y  we  shall  find  reason,  from  experience  and  observa- 
tion, to  believe  that  there  are  parts  of  our  system  where  the 
stars  are  not  scattered  in  the  manner  here  supposed,  we  ought 
then  to  make  proper  exceptions." 

I  propose  now  to  describe  how  Herschel  did  "find 
reason,  from  experience  and  observation,  to  believe  that" 
the  Milky  Way  itself,  which  he  had  thus  far  regarded  as 
not  only  resembling  the  rest  of  the  sidereal  system,  but  as 
being  the  sidereal  system  (the  stars  scattered  over  our  skies 
being  merely  parts  of  the  Milky  Way  stratum)  is  composed 


Star-  Gauging.  257 

of  stars  quite  differently  arranged  from  those  composing 
the  rest  of  the  sidereal  system ;  I  shall  shew  how  he 
devised  another  mode  of  star-gauging  differing  essentially 
in  plan  and  principle  from  that  which  he  adopted  in  1784, 
and  first  applied  systematically  in  1785  ;  and  then  I  shall 
endeavour  to  shew  how  the  careful  comparison  of  his 
results  with  others  obtained  since  his  time,  suggests  a 
method  of*  star-gauging  combining  the  principles  of  both 
Herschel's  methods,  advantageously  applicable  with  every 
order  of  telescopic  power,  and  promising,  if  patiently 
applied  by  a  sufficient  number  of  observers,  to  lift  the 
veil  from  some  at  least  of  the  mysteries  of  the  stellar 
depths. 

Let  us  pause,  however,  for  a  moment  to  notice  that  a  new 
interest  is  given  to  Sir  W.  Herschel's  researches  when  his 
earlier  papers  are  correctly  interpreted.  We  see  him 
preparing  in  1785  to  deal  with  the  most  stupendous  of  all 
the  problems  of  astronomy.  A  noble  theory  of  the 
universe  had  presented  itself  to  his  mind,  and  already  he 
had  carried  out  a  series  of  observations  tending  to  indicate 
the  proportions  of  the  sidereal  system,  if  that  theory  were 
true.  But  now  he  was  preparing  for  labours  of  a  more 
arduous  kind,  the  thorough  examination,  in  fact,  of  the 
stellar  heavens  so  far  as  they  were  visible  from  his 
northern  point  of  view.  No  celestial  objects,  except 
the  members  of  our  solar  system,  and  the  mysterious 
comets,  were  to  be  regarded  as  unimportant  in  this 
inquiry.  The  stars  by  their  distribution  in  greater  or 
less  profusion,  the  nebulae  and  clusters  within  our  system 


258  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

as  representing  various  stages  of  stellar  aggregation,  those 
external  to  it  as  indicating  its  more  striking  characteristics, 
and  other  orders  of  objects  (not  suspected  when  he  began 
his  labours),  as  affording  new  evidence  respecting  its 
structure, — all  might  throw  light  on  the  theory  he  had 
advanced,  or  might,  when  carefully  studied,  afford  reason 
for  abandoning  or  modifying  that  theory. 

I  apprehend,  then,  that  had  the  notice  of  astronomers 
been  attracted,  at  this  early  stage,  to  the  work  on  which 
Herschel  was  entering,  they  could  not  but  have  awaited 
with  extreme  interest  the  result  of  his  labours.  It  does 
not  appear  that  this  was  actually  the  casa  It  may  be 
that  the  difficulty  and  complexity  of  the  problem  he  had 
taken  in  hand,  or  perchance  the  quiet  and  unobtrusive 
manner  in  which  he  presented  it  as  it  then  appeared  to 
him,  or  some  other  cause  may  have  been  in  operation,  but 
certain  it  is  that  very  little  notice  was  taken  of  Herschel's 
special  work  then,  or  during  the  remainder  of  his  life. 
None  helped  him,  though  his  researches  were  manifestly 
far  beyond  the  strength  of  any  single  worker.  No  com- 
ments on  his  stellar  observations,  so  far  as  they  related  to 
the  great  problem  he  was  attacking,  were  made  by  con- 
temporary astronomers.*  It  was  alone,  but  confidently, 
that  he  advanced  into  the  mysterious  depths  surrounding 
our  solar  system,  seeking  by  the  dim  light  which  made 

*  To  the  general  public  Herschel  was  known  as  the  discoverer  of 
the  Georgium  Sidua,  the  observer  of  supposed  volcanic  eruptions  on  the 
inoon,  and  for  a  variety  of  other  such  discoveries  as  are  easily  under- 
stood,— or  misunderstood  (which  comes  to  the  same  thing  so  far  as 
general  fame  is  concerned). 


Star-  Gaug  ing.  259 

the  darkness  visible,  to  determine,  if  it  might  be,  the 
forms  dimly  discernible  within  those  gloomy  wildernesses 
of  space. 

Many  years  passed  before  he  again  addressed  the 
scientific  world  on  the  great  subject  which  he  had  taken 
as  the  "ultimate  object  of  his  observations."  Eleven 
years  *  after  the  enunciation  of  the  theory  described  in  the 
former  part  of  this  essay,  we  find  him  pointing  out,  as  the 
result  of  his  researches  during  that  long  period,  that  the 
hypothesis  of  a  general  uniformity  of  structure  in  the 
galaxy  "  is  too  far  removed  from  the  truth  to  be  depended 
upon."  And  although  this  does  not  imply  a  definite 
withdrawal  from  the  theory  of  1785,  yet  the  stress  now  laid 
by  Herschel  on  probable  varieties  of  structure  is  a  novel 
feature  in  his  theoretical  treatment  of  the  subject. 

But  it  was  in  1802,  (seventeen  years,  be  it  noticed,  after 
the  theory  had  appeared  which  is  so  commonly  referred  to 
as  though  it  were  the  result  of  Herscliel's  observations 
instead  of  the  occasion  of  them,)  that  Herschel  first  began 
to  present  an  entirely  new  view  of  the  general  structure 
of  the  universe.  In  the  essay  of  that  year  he  described 
the  results  to  which  he  had  been  led  by  the  study  of 
double  stars.  As  Struve  has  well  pointed  out,  there  was 
much  in  Herschel's  work  in  this  direction  which  naturally 
suggested  the  adoption  of  new  views  on  the  wider  subject 

*  The  paper  of  1789  contained  a  list  of  1000  nebulae  discovered  by 
Herschel,  and  was  prefaced  by  a  remarkable  essay  on  the  gradual 
development  of  stellar  nebulae.  The  reasoning  does  not  readily  admit 
of  condensation,  and  this  part  of  the  paper  is  too  long  to  be  quoted  in 
full. 

12 


260  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

of  the  sidereal  universe  itself.  He  had  begun  to  observe 
double  stars,  liot  with  the  idea  of  recognising  any  connection 
between  the,  components  of  these  objects,  but  on  the  con- 
trary, in  the  belief  that  double  stars  are  simply  stars  which, 
though  really  at  enormous  distances  from  each  other, 
chance  to  lie  nearly  in  the  same  direction  as  seen  by  the 
terrestrial  observer.  He  conceived  (independently,  we 
may  suppose,  though  Galileo  and  Christian  Huyghens  had 
anticipated  him),  the  idea  of  determining  the  distance  of 
the  brighter,  and  presumably  the  nearer,  member  of  such 
a  pair  of  stars,  by  noticing  how  much  the  orbital  motion 
of  the  earth  caused  the  brighter  star  to  shift  in  position 
with  respect  to  the  fainter  (necessarily  much  less  affected 
by  the  earth's  motion  if  really  much  farther  away  than  the 
brighter).  It  would  be  interesting  to  note  how  the 
prosecution  of  this  task,  begun  long  before  1784,  gradually 
led  Herschel  to  the  conception  of  binary  systems,  and 
later  to  the  certain  assurance  that  there  are  many  systems 
of  this  class  in  the  celestial  depths.  Still  more  interesting 
would  be  the  history  of  the  steps  by  which  he  was  led 
from  the  same  starting-point,  but  on  another  course,  to  the 
discovery  of  the  motion  of  our  sun  through  space,  and 
therefore  to  the  recognition  of  that  most  stupendous  of 
the  phenomena  presented  by  the  heavens  to  us, — the 
motion  of  all  the  suns  accompanied  by  their  attendant 
systems  through  the  interstellar  regions.  But  these 
matters,  full  of  interest  though  they  are,  must  here  be 
touched  on  only  incidentally,  in  their  relation  to  the 
processes  of  star-gauging,  by  which  Herschel  hoped  in 


Star-  Gauging.  261 

a  more  direct  manner  to  ascertain  the  structure  of  the 
universe. 

It  was  natural  that  the  recognition  of  binary  stars, — that 
is,  of  pairs  of  stars  not  merely  connected  by  an  optical  rela- 
tion, but  specially  associated  by  the  bonds  of  their  mutual 
attraction,  should  suggest  to  Herschel  the  conception  of 
other  and  more  complicated  systems,  and  that  he  should 
be  prepared  thenceforth  to  find  in  the  star-depths  other 
relations  than  those  which  the  analogy  of  our  sun  had 
suggested.  Our  sun  is  an  insulated  star,  the  components 
of  a  "  binary  "  are  associated  stars.  May  not  higher  orders 
of  association  exist,  affecting  other  stars  than  those  mani- 
festly belonging  to  clusters  or  nebulae  ?  For  note  that, 
although  the  conception  of  associated  stars  had  already 
(as  I  have  shewn)  been  abundantly  recognised  by  Herschel 
in  the  paper  of  1785,  yet  the  cases  in  which  it  had  been 
recognized  were  those  in  which  it  was  obvious  at  a  single 
view  ;  the  study  of  double  stars  had  led  to  the  conclusion 
that  stars  not  obviously  associated,  stars  to  which  the 
method  of  star-gauging  would  have  been  applied  without 
any  suspicion,  might  be  so  near  as  to  be  bound  together, 
(and,  as  it  were,  separated  from  other  stars)  by  their  mutual 
attraction.  Herschel  never  applied  his  first  method  of 
star-gauging  to  any  field  of  view  containing  a  cluster  of 
stars,  in  such  sort  as  to  infer  from  the  large  number  of 
stars  in  the  cluster  an  enormous  extension  of  the  sidereal 
system  in  the  direction  of  that  field  of  view.  He  himself 
pointed  out  the  objection  to  such  an  inference — the  fact, 
namely,  that  a  cluster  is.  manifestly  a  rounded  group  of 


262  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

stars,  not  a  region  of  the  sky  which  is  rich  because  of 
enormous  extension  in  the  line  of  sight.  But  until  many 
double  stars  had  been  proved  to  be  '  binaries,'  or  pairs  of 
stars  'whereof  the  one  more  bright  is  circled  by  the 
other,'  he  would  not  have  thought  of  excluding  fields  in 
which  double,  triple,  and  multiple  stars  were  numerous. 
Now  however  (in  1802),  that  he  has  to  describe  the 
recognition  of  binary  stars,  we  find  him  for  the  first  time 
drawing  a  distinction  between  insulated  stars  and  all 
orders  of  multiple  stars. 

It  is  worthy  of  notice,  especially  by  those  who  know 
what  interest  Sir  W.  Herschel  took  in  the  subject  of  life 
in  other  worlds,*  that  he  regarded  the  insulated  suns  as 
alone,  in  all  probability,  the  centres  of  planetary  systems 
resembling  our  own.  *  The  question  will  arise/  he  says, 
'  whether  every  insulated  star  be  a  sun  like  ours,  attended 
with  planets,  satellites,  and  numerous  comets  ?  And  here, 
as  nothing  appears  against  the  supposition,  we  may  from 
analogy  admit  the  probability  of  it  But,  were  we  to 
extend  this  argument  to  other  sidereal  constructions,  or 
still  further  to  every  star  of  the  heavens,  as  has  been  done 
frequently,  I  should  not  only  hesitate,  but  even  think 
that,  from  what  will  be  said  of  stars  which  enter  into 
complicated  sidereal  systems,  the  contrary  is  far  more 
likely  to  be  the  case  ;  and  that  probably  we  can  only  look 
for  solar  systems  among  insulated  stars.' 

*  His  discussion  of  the  question  whether  life  can  exist  in  our  own 
Bun,  is,  perhaps,  the  strongest  extant  proof  of  the  interest  which  this 
subject  had  for  him. 


Star-Gauging.  263 

Observing,  then,  that  in  1802  Herschel  first  presented 
the  distinction  between  insulated  stars  and  '  those  which 
enter  into  complicated  sidereal  systems,'  a  capital  interest 
attaches  to  whatever  he  might  at  that  time  say  about 
the  Milky  Way.  In  1785,  he  had  so  fully  believed  the 
Milky  Way  to  be  only  the  richer  part  of  our  sidereal 
system,  that  he  took  the  name  Milky  Way  as  a  conven- 
ient title  for  the  whole  system,  and  called  those  nebula3 
which  he  believed  to  be  external  sidereal  systems,  '  Milky 
Ways,'  as  adequately  distinguishing  them  from  the 
clusters  and  nebulae  which  form  parts  of  our  stellar 
system.  Let  us  see  whether  in  1802  he  so  viewed  the 
Milky  Way — for  we  may  be  assured  that  if  he  did,  his 
views  in  1802  were  in  the  main  very  much  like  those  he 
had  held  in  1785,  whereas  if  he  did  not,  we  may  be  sure 
his  views  were  greatly  altered.  His  words  are  decisive 
on  this  all-important  point : — 

"  The  stars  we  consider  as  insulated  are  also  surrounded 
by  a  magnificent  collection  of  innumerable  stars,  called 
the  Milky  Way,  which  must  occasion  a  very  powerful 
balance  of  opposite  attractions  to  hold  the  intermediate 
stars  in  a  state  of  rest.  For  though  our  sun  and  all  the 
stars  we  see,  may  truly  be  said  to  be  in  the  plane  of  the 
Milky  Way,  yet  /  am  now  convinced  by  a  long  inspection 
and  continued  examination  of  it,  that  the  Milky  Way  itself 
consists  of  stars  very  differently  scattered  from  those  which 
are  immediately  about  us" 

So  much  as  to  the  general  and  more  important  view  of 
the  question.  It  is  clear  that  by  the  words,  'a  long 


264  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

inspection  and  continued  examination  of  the  Milky  Way,' 
Herschel  refers  to  the  seventeen  years  of  observation 
which  had  followed  the  enunciation  of  the  views  he  held 
in  1785.  It  is  clear  also  from  the  words,  '  I  am  now 
convinced'  that  he  had  changed  his  views,  apart  from 
the  proof  of  the  fact  which  I  have  deduced  from  the 
comparison  of  his  statements  in  1785,  with  the  results  to 
which  he  had  been  led  in  1802.  I  mean,  that  no  nice 
analysis  of  his  words  is  required  to  shew  that  in  1802  he 
came  before  the  scientific  world  with  entirely  new  ideas 
as  to  the  construction  of  the  universe  ;  since  he  says  as 
much  very  plainly — almost  as  plainly  as  (we  shall 
presently  see)  he  stated  the  fact  nine  years  later  in  the 
preface  to  the  remarkable  paper  of  1811. 

But  let  us  see  in  what  the  change  of  view  consisted : — 
'  On  a  very  slight  examination,'  *  he  says,  speaking  of 
the  Milky  Way,  '  it  will  appear  that  this  immense  starry 
aggregation  is  by  no  means  uniform.  The  stars  of  which 
it  is  composed  are  very  unequally  scattered,  and  show 
evident  marks  of  clustering  together  into  many  separate 
allotments.  By  referring  to  some  one  of  these  clustering 
collections  in  the  heavens,  what  will  be  said  of  them  will 
be  much  better  understood  than  if  we  were  to  treat  of 
them  in  a  general  way.'  He  selects  the  fine  portion  of 

*  One  might  pause  here  to  ask  whether,  speaking  as  he  does  here  of 
a  'very  slight  examination,'  Herschel  can  be  referring  to  results  to 
which  he  had  been  led  '  by  a  long  inspection  and  continued  examina- 
tion.' But  I  think  we  need  not  find  any  difficulty  in  this,  since  results 
acquired  with  great  labour  may  need  but  a  very  slight  examination  to 
indicate  highly  significant  truths. 


Star-  Gauging.  265 

the  Milky  "Way  which  occupies  the  lower  half  of  the 
'  Cross '  in  the  constellation  Cygnus  (a  group  which  may 
be  fairly  called  the  Northern  Cross).  Here,  he  says,  '  the 
stars  are  clustering  with  a  kind  of  division  between  them, 
so  that  we  may  suppose  them  to  be  clustering  towards  two 
different  regions.  By  a  computation  founded  on  observa- 
tions which  ascertain  the  number  of  stars  in  different  fields 
of  view,  it  appears  that  our  space  '  in  Cygnus,'  *  taking  an 
average  breadth  of  about  five  degrees  of  it,  contains  more 
than  331,000  stars  ;t  and  admitting  them  to  be  clustering 
two  different  ways,  we  have  165,000  stars  for  each  cluster- 
ing collection.  Now  the  above-mentioned  milky  appear- 
ances deserve  the  name  of  clustering  collections,  \  as  they 
are  certainly  much  brighter  about  the  middle,  and  fainter 
near  their  undefined  borders.  Tor  in  my  sweeps  of  the 
heavens  it  has  been  fully  ascertained  that  the  brightness 
of  the  Milky  Way  arises  only  from  stars,  and  that  their 
compression  increases  according  to  the  brightness  of  the 
Milky  Way.' 

It  is  not  easy  to  overrate  the  importance  of  the  results 
embodied  in  the  reasoning  here  quoted.  Here  are  two  rich 

*  That  is  the  selected  portion  of  the  Milky  Way. 

t  More  stars  in  this  small  space,  as  viewed  by  Herschel's  18-inch  re- 
flector, than  in  the  whole  northern  heavens,  including  this  space  as 
viewed  with  Argelander's  2£-inch  telescope.  And  yet  my  chart  of 
Argelander's  results  presents  324,000  stars  as  a  collection  bewildering 
in  its  richness. 

J  The  reader's  attention  is  specially  directed  to  the  fact  that  the 
clustering  collections  here  spoken  of  are  not  telescopic  small  clusters. 
They  are  two  of  the  cloudlike  masses  which  the  Milky  Way  presents 
to  ordinary  vision  on  any  dark,  clear  night. 


266  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

regions  of  the  Milky  Way  (which,  according  to  the  theory 
of  1785,  indicated  two  projecting  regions  of  the  stellar 
system),  now  viewed  as  clustering  collections,  and  selected 
as  typical  instances  of  want  of  uniformity  in  the  structure 
of  the  Milky  Way.  They  are  not  clustering  collections  in 
appearance  only — that  of  course  would  have  been  no  new 
fact,  and  would  not  have  been  worth  announcing  to  the 
scientific  world ;  but  they  are  real  aggregations  of  stars, 
surrounded  on  all  sides  by  relatively  vacant  space.  Be- 
tween us,  therefore,  and  these  rich  clustering  regions,  there 
lies  a  vast  space  not  so  richly  filled  with  stars.  The  con- 
tinuity of  structure  within  the  sidereal  system,  which 
constituted  the  very  basis  of  the  first  method  of  star- 
gauging,  is  accordingly  disproved.  Thus  the^rs^  method  of 
star-gauging  is  shewn  to  be  inapplicable  in  this  case  and  in 
all  similar  cases.  Moreover  the  case  being  typical  of  the 
general  want  of  uniformity  in  the  structure  of  the  Milky 
Way,  the  first  method  of  star-gauging  fails  for  the  Milky 
Way  itself,  to  interpret  the  nature  of  which  it  had  been 
originally  devised. 

If  any  doubt  remain  in  the  reader's  mind  as  to  Herschel's 
real  meaning—  if,  for  instance,  it  be  supposed  possible  that 
Herschel  may  after  all  have  referred  to  aggregation  in 
particular  parts  of  the  heavens,  as  distinguished  from 
aggregation  in  particular  regions  of  space — then  what 
Herschel  proceeds  to  say  respecting  the  great  rich  regions 
in  Cygnus,  can  scarcely  fail  to  remove  all  question  as  to 
his  meaning.  Yet,  before  quoting  his  words,  I  must 
premise  that  again  we  have  to  deal  with  a  passage  which, 


Star-  Gauging.  267 

though  really  unmistakable,  requires  careful  attention 
before  its  real  import  can  be  apprehended  : — 

'  We  may  indeed/  he  says  (as  if  expressing  hesitation, 
though  really  about  to  render  his  inferences  more  certain), 
'partly  ascribe  the  increase  both  of  brightness  and  of 
apparent  compression '  in  those  clustering  regions,  '  to  a 
greater  depth  of  the  space  which  contains  the  stars,  but 
this  will  equally  tend  to  shew  their  clustering  condition  ; 
for  since  the  increase  of  brightness  is  gradual,  the  space 
containing  the  clustering  stars  must  tend  to  a  spherical  form, 
if  the  gradual  increase  of  brightness  is  to  be  explained  by 
the  situation  of  the  stars.'  In  other  words,  whether  we 
consider  the  greater  central  richness  as  due  to  the  cluster- 
ing of  the  stars  towards  the  central  parts  of  these  groups, 
or  to  the  shape  of  the  groups  themselves,  or  partly  con- 
sider both  causes  of  central  aggregation,  we  are  still  led 
to  the  conclusion  that  the  groups  are  roughly  spherical  in 
shape. 

As  the  whole  theory  of  1785  was  concerned  in  the 
reasoning  here  presented,  I  cannot  too  specially  invite  the 
reader's  attention  to  the  result  to  which  Herschel  had 
been  led.  I  may  illustrate  the  distinction  between 
Herschel's  views  in  1802  and  those  which  he  held  in  1785 
in  the  following  manner :  We  know  that  when  a 
moderately  thick  low-lying  mist  covers  a  level  plain,  an 
observer  placed  on  the  plain  sees  through  the  mist  above 
him,  while  near  the  direction  of  his  horizon  it  is  im- 
penetrable, because  the  line  of  sight  extends  so  much  farther 
through  it  in  such  a  direction.  Now,  let  us  suppose  the 


268  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

case  of  a  being — a  visitant,  let  us  say,  from  another  world 
— not  familiar  as  we  all  are  with  the  appearances 
commonly  presented  by  clouds,  mists,  or  fogs,  and 
introduced  gradually  to  their  various  forms.  If  placed  on 
a  plain  in  the  circumstances  above  described,  he  would 
readily  convince  himself  that  the  impenetrability  of  the 
air  towards  the  horizon  was  due  to  the  fact  that  a  mist 
within  which  he  was  himself  placed  had  the  shape  of  a 
flat  stratum,  so  that  where  he  looked  along  or  nearly  along 
the  direction  of  the  stratum's  extension,  the  line  of  sight 
passed  through  a  much  greater  range  of  mist.  And  we 
may  conceive  him  attempting  to  determine  the  shape  (the 
relative  thickness  and  extension)  of  the  misty  stratum,  by 
a  method  analogous  to  Sir  W.  Herschel's  first  method  of 
star-gauging,  estimating  the  extension  of  the  mist  in 
different  directions  by  the  apparent  density  of  the  mist  in 
those  directions.  But  now,  suppose  our  observer  intro-. 
duced  to  a  new  state  of  things.  Conceive  him  placed  on 
a  level  plain,  with  mist  enough  low  down  to  hide  all 
terrestrial  objects  which  otherwise  might  guide  his  eye, 
and  that  the  sky  for  a  considerable  distance  from  the 
horizon  is  wholly  cloud-laden,  but  not  mist-enshrouded, 
the  sky  overhead  being  visible,  with  occasional  cloud 
masses  suspended  there,  while  more  and  more  clouds  are 
in  view  the  farther  the  line  of  sight  is  directed  from  the 
point  overhead.  We  can  readily  conceive  that  the  first 
interpretation  he  would  assign  to  the  observed  appearances 
would  correspond  with  the  result  of  his  former  observa- 
tions. He  would  suppose  that  towards  the  horizon  there 


Star-Gauging.  269 

was  a  great  extension  of  mist-laden  air,  and  that  there 
was  also  a  great  extension  of  misty  matter  towards  those 
parts  of  the  upper  sky  which  shewed  an  impenetrable 
cloudiness.  He  would  not  at  first  be  prepared  to  conceive 
a  state  of  things  unlike  that  which  he  had  formerly 
recognised,  or  to  suppose  there  was  not,  as  in  that  case,  a 
continuity  of  mist-laden  air  between  himself  and  those 
regions  where  he  perceived  dense  cloudiness.  Gradually, 
however,  the  idea  would  present  itself  that  the  round- 
looking  cloudy  regions  were  really  round  in  shape, — not 
bounded  merely  by  an  apparent  outline  on  the  sky,  but 
by  a  rounded  surface,  outside  of  which  he,  the  observer, 
was  placed.  A  variety  of  observations  so  familiar  to  us 
that  we  hardly  recognise  the  process  of  reasoning  by  which 
the  mind  becomes  satisfied  with  their  significance,  would 
before  long  satisfy  our  observer  of  the  justice  of  this  con- 
clusion. He  would  soon  see  reason  to  believe  that  not 
only  the  clouds  seen  separately  overhead,  but  those  con- 
fusedly intermixed  towards  the  horizon  through  the  effects 
of  foreshortening,  were  in  reality  rounded  masses  of  mist- 
laden  air.  Now,  just  as  markedly  as  the  groups  of  clouds 
which  are  seen  on  a  summer's  day  differ  from  a  low-lying 
mist  (so  far  as  their  relation  to  the  observer  is  concerned} 
so  completely  does  the  system  of  great  stellar  clusterings 
recognized  in  the  Milky  Way  by  Herschel  in  1802,  differ 
from  the  stratum  of  stars,  small  clusters,  and  nebulae,  of 
which  in  1785  he  supposed  the  Milky  Way  to  be  the  fore- 
shortened, and  the  stars  of  our  constellations  to  be  the  trans- 
verse view. 


2  70  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

But  it  does  not  follow  that  Herschel  in  giving  up  the 
most  striking  result  to  which  his  first  method  of  star- 
gauging  had  seemed  to  lead,  was  bound  to  give  up  also  the 
method  itself.  It  had  failed  for  certain  cases,  simply 
because  the  principle  on  which  it  was  based  was  not 
applicable  to  those  cases  ;  but  wherever  there  was  any  ap- 
proach to  the  uniformity  of  scattering  on  which  the  method 
depends,  there  the  method  might  still  be  applied.  Precisely 
as  our  imagined  observer  might  still  continue  to  test  the 
shape  and  extension  of  a  mist  in  which  he  found  himself 
involved,  by  noting  its  apparent  density  towards  different 
directions,  abandoning  that  method  only  where  he  had 
reason  to  believe  that  cloudiness  was  due  to  mist  within 
which  he  was  not  placed,  so  Herschel  might  still  refer 
the  richness  of  many  of  his  star-gauges  to  great  exten- 
sion of  stars  in  the  corresponding  directions,  abandoning' 
such  inferences  only  where  he  had  reason  to  believe  that 
he  was  analysing  the  wealth  of  great  clustering  aggrega- 
tions outside  the  bounds  of  which  our  solar  system  is 
situated. 

But  although  after  1802  Herschel  still  occasionally 
referred  to  his  first  series  of  star-gauges,  we  do  not  find 
that  he  any  longer  regarded  them  in  the  same  light  as  in 
1785. 

As  my  subject  now  is  star-gauging  according  to  the  two 
methods  devised  by  Herschel,  I  scarcely  feel  justified  in 
entering  at  any  length  into  another  striking  feature  of  the 
paper  of  1802.  And  yet  it  may  be  well,  to  notice  how 
markedly  Herschel's  whole  conception  of  the  constitution 


Star-  Gauging.  271 

of  the  universe  changed  at  that  epoch.  Not  only  did  he  in 
1802  advance  his  proof  of  the  association  between  double 
and  multiple  stars,  deducing  thence  and  otherwise  illus- 
trating his  inferences  respecting  wider  laws  of  association, 
but  he  also  selected  this  occasion  to  abandon  the  theory 
that,  the  great  irresolvable  nebulse  are  composed  of  stars. 
He  now  regarded  some  among  them  as  'possessing  the 
quality  of  self-luminous,  milky  luminosity,  and  possibly 
at  no  great  distance  from  us.'  * 

*  It  is  worthy  of  notice  how  readily  a  logically  trained  mind  recog- 
nizes incongruities  in  result  apparently  presented  with  the  highest 
possible  authority.  It  is  well  known  that  Humboldt,  quoting  Arago's 
account  of  the  results  of  Herschel's  labours — so  that  the  combined 
weight  of  these  three  names  seemed  to  authorise  the  statement — 
presents  our  sidereal  system  as  a  "starry  island,  or  nebula,"  forming 
a  '  lens-shaped,  flattened,  and  everywhere  detached  stratum. ' 
Herbert  Spencer,  reasoning  on  the  relations  presented  by  Humboldt, 
shews  the  incongruity  and  absurdity  of  the  statements  ( 1 )  that  this  our 
island  nebula  has  such  and  such  proportions,  and  (2)  that  the  nebulse 
are  remote  sidereal  systems,  whether  we  assume,  with  Humboldt  and 
Arago,  that  the  differences  of  star  magnitude  are  due  to  differences  of 
distance,  or  reject  this  assumption.  In  a  letter  written  to  a  weekly 
journal  on  Jan.  31,  1870,  Mr  Spencer,  after  quoting  the  passages  in 
which  he  had  shewn  this,  remarks  that  '  when  they  were  written 
spectrum  analysis  had  not  yielded  the  conclusive  proof  which  we  now 
possess,  that  many  nebulaa  consist  of  matter  in  a  diffused  form.  But 
quite  apart  from  the  evidence  yielded  by  spectrum  analysis,  it  seems 
to  me  that  the  incongruities  and  contradictions  which  may  be  evolved 
from  the  hypothesis  that  nebulae  are  remote  sidereal  systems,  amply 
suffice  to  shew  that  hypothesis  to  be  untenable.  '  Thus,  in  this  case 
Spencer  was  led  by  abstract  reasoning  to  reject  a  conclusion  which,  so 
far  as  his  authority  could  be  trusted,  had  the  combined  weight  in  its 
favour  of  Sir  W.  Herschel's  opinion,  Arago's,  and  Humboldt's,  and 
which  astronomical  authorities  had  never  been  at  the  pains  to  question. 
Yet  the  conclusion  to  which  Spencer  was  thus  led  on  the  comparatively 
slight  evidence  he  possessed  was,  in  reality,  the  same  which  Sir  W. 
Herschel  had  adopted  in  1802,  after  a  score  of  years  of  persistent  study 


272  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

In  1811,  Herschel  published  another  remarkable  essay, 
mainly  relating  to  the  milky  luminosity  which  he  had  now 
recognized,  not  only  in  nebulous  patches,  but  spread  thinly 

of  the  heavens.  Comparing  the  value  of  Spencer's  abstract  reasoning 
with  that  of  the  enormous  mass  of  observed  facts  which  astronomers 
had  been  collecting  during  a  half-century  since  Herschel's  day — so 
long  as  these  facts  remained  unsifted — we  find  a  curious  illustration  of 
the  mistake  made  by  those  who  would  divorce  observation  from  theory. 
In  the  same  paper  by  Mr  Spencer,  there  occurs  the  following  passage  : — 
'"The  spaces  which  precede  or  follow  simple  nebulae,"  says  Arago, 
"and,  a  fortiori,  groups  of  nebulae,  contain  generally  few  stars. 
Herschel  found  this  rule  to  be  invariable.  Thus  every  time  that, 
during  a  short  interval,  no  star  approached,  in  virtue  of  the  diurnal 
motion,  to  place  itself  in  the  field  of  his  motionless  telescope,  he  was 
accustomed  to  say  to  the  secretary  who  assisted  him,  '  Prepare  to 
write  ;  nebulae  are  about  to  arrive. "  '  How  does  this  fact  consist  with 
the  hypothesis  that  nebulae  are  remote  galaxies  ?  If  there  were  but 
one  nebula,  it  would  be  a  curious  coincidence  were  this  one  nebula  so 
placed  in  the  distant  regions  of  space  as  to  agree  in  direction  with  a 
starless  spot  in  our  own  sidereal  system.  If  there  were  but  two 
nebulae,  and  both  were  so  placed,  the  coincidence  would  be  excessively 
strange.  What,  then,  shall  we  say  on  finding  that  they  are  habitually 
so  placed?  (the  last  five  words  replace  some  that  are  possibly  a  little 
too  strong).  .  .  .  When  to  the  fact  that  the  general  mass  of  nebulae 
are  antithetical  in  position  to  the  general  mass  of  stars,  we  add  the 
fact  that  local  regions  of  nebulae  are  regions  where  stars  are 
scarce,  and  the  further  fact  that  single  nebulae  are  habitually  found  in 
comparatively  starless  spots,  does  not  the  proof  of  a  physical  connec- 
tion become  overwhelming  ?  "  Here  Mr  Spencer  has  deduced  from 
the  same  facts  which  Arago  and  other  astronomers  have  quoted  in 
favour  of  the  theory  of  external  nebulae,  the  inference  which  Sir  W. 
Herschel  arrived  at,  as  we  may  see  from  the  two  passages  quoted 
in  an  earlier  part  of  this  essay  (see  page  253).  It  is  singular, 
however,  how  little  weight  the  argument,  from  the  improbability 
of  repeated  coincidences,  here  correctly  applied  by  Spencer,  has 
with  ordinary  minds.  Michell  employed  this  argument  skilfully  more 
than  a  century  ago,  in  effect  demonstrating  the  laws  of  association 
between  certain  groups  of  stars  :  but  it  was  not  till  Sir  W.  Herschel 
had  actually  watched  one  star  circling  around  another  that  even 


Sta  r-  Gauging.  273 

over  large  parts  of  the  heavens,  and  had  learned  to  dis- 
tinguish it  from  the  milky  light  produced  by  multitudes 
of  distant  stars.  His  observations  and  deductions  are  full 
of  interest,  and  especially  interesting  are  his  ideas  as  to 
the  evolution  of  stars  from  the  matter  producing  milky 
nebulous  light.  However,  except  in  so  far  as  they  indicate 
his  changed  views  respecting  the  constitution  of  the  universe, 
these  matters,  worthy  of  study  though  they  are  in  them- 
selves, do  not  here  concern  us.  There  is  one  passage, 
however,  from  the  essay  of  1811,  which  cannot  be  too 
carefully  studied  by  those  who  would  rightly  apprehend 
the  nature  and  results  of  Herschel's  work  during  the 
twenty-six  years  which  had  now  elapsed  since  he  enun- 
ciated the  stratum  theory  of  the  sidereal  system: — "I  must 
freely  confess,"  he  says,  "that  by  continuing  my  sweeps 
of  the  heavens,  my  opinion  of  the  arrangement  of  the  stars 
and  their  magnitudes,  and  of  some  other  particulars  has 
undergone  a  gradual  change;  and  indeed,  when  the  novelty 
of  the  subject  is  considered  we  cannot  be  surprised  that 
many  things  formerly  taken  for  granted  should,  on 
examination,  prove  to  be  different  from  what  they  were 
generally  but  incautiously  supposed  to  be.  For  instance, 
an  equal  scattering  of  the  stars  may  be  admitted  in  certain 
calculations ;  but  when  we  examine  the  Milky  Way  or  the 
closely  compressed  clusters  of  stars,  of  which  my  catalogues 

astronomers  began  to  believe  in  such  systems  ;  and  a  third  of  a 
century  later  still,  the  idea  was  not  accepted  save  by  a  few  astronomers. 
Abstract  reasoning  must  be  strong  indeed  (and  easy  to  follow,  also)  to 
overcome  the  inertia  of  slow  apprehension. 


2  74  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

have  recorded  so  many  instances,  this  supposed  equality  of 
scattering  must  be  given  up.  We  may  also  have  supposed 
nebulae  to  be  no  other  than  clusters  of  stars  disguised  by 
their  very  great  distance ;  but  a  longer  experience  and  a 
better  acquaintance  with  the  nature  of  nebulse,  will  not 
allow  a  general  admission  of  such  a  principle ;  although 
undoubtedly  a  cluster  of  stars  may  assume  a  nebular 
appearance  when  it  is  too  remote  for  us  to  discern  the  stars 
of  which  it  is  composed." 

It  will  be  observed  that  in  this  passage  Herschel 
abandons  two  of  the  principles  on  which  his  views  in  ]  785 
had  been  founded,*  the  general  uniformity  of  stellar 
distribution,  and  the  theory  that  all  nebulas,  whether 
components  of  our  system  or  external,  are  formed  of  stars. 
Each  of  the  two  principles  here  given  up  was  essential  to 
that  theory  (in  its  entirety),  while  the  first  of  the  two 
principles  was  cardinal  even  as  respects  the  general 
relations  of  the  theory.  Two  links  of  the  chain  of  ideas 
enunciated  by  Herschel  in  1785  were  now  rejected  (as  in 
fact  broken  under  the  strain  of  observation).  One  of  these, 
at  least,  had  to  bear  so  large  a  part  of  the  theory,  that  with 
its  failure  the  theory  itself  came  to  the  ground. 

It  must  have  been,  then,  at  about  this  time,  certainly 
not  later,  that  the  necessity  for  a  new  method  of  star- 
gauging  presented  itself  to  Herschel's  mind.  He  was, 
however,  too  busily  engaged  in  observing  nebulae  and  in 
endeavouring  to  detect  the  law  of  their  development,  to 

*  Compare  the  italicized  passage  in  the  quotation  at  page  256 
of  the  present  Essay. 


Star-Gauging.  275 

enter  on  any  scheme  of  observation  for  determining  the 
constitution  of  the  universe.  It  is  necessary  to  notice, 
however,  before  we  pass  to  the  new  attack  made  by 
Herschel  on  the  wider  subject,  that  he  now  recognised  a 
much  more  complete  series  of  celestial  objects  than  he  had 
imagined  in  1785.  Then,  and  in  the  remarkable  paper  of 
1789,  he  pictured  various  degrees  of  stellar  aggregation, 
from  uniformly  scattered  stars  to  the  most  compressed 
clusters.  Now,  he  placed  at  the  lower  extremity  of  the 
scale  of  celestial  objects  the  widely  spread  luminosity  first 
noticed  in  the  paper  of  1802.  He  passed  from  this 
irregularly  diffused  nebulosity  through  all  the  orders  of 
gaseous  nebulae — irregular  nebulas,  planetary  nebulas, 
nebulous  stars — formed  by  the  gradual  condensation  of  the 
gaseous  matter,  until  the  star  itself  is  formed  ;  then,  and 
then  only,  he  entered  on  the  part  of  the  series  earlier 
recognised,  passing  on  to  the  various  orders  of  stellar 
aggregation, — diffused  clusters,  ordinary  stellar  nebulae, 
and  more  and  more  condensed  stars,  up  to  the  richest 
clusters.  He  no  longer  speaks  of  external  nebulas. 
The  paper  of  1814  begins  with  these  words : — "  The 
observations  contained  in  this  paper  are  intended  to  display 
the  sidereal  part  of  the  heavens,  and  also  to  show  the 
intimate  connection  between  the  two  opposite  extremes, 
one  of  which  is  the  immensity  of  the  widely  diffused  and 
seemingly  chaotic  nebulous  matter;  and  the  other  the 
highly  complicated  and  most  artificially  constructed 
globular  clusters  of  compressed  stars.  The  proof  of  an 
intimate  connection  between  these  extremes  will  greatly 


276  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

support  the  probability  of  the  conversion  of  one  into  the 
other." 

For  much  that  relates  to  the  sidereal  heavens,  Herschel 
refers  in  this  paper  of  1814  to  the  paper  of  1785,  and  it 
may  be  that  such  reference  has  prevented  [most  of  his 
commentators  from  noticing  how  completely  his  views  had 
changed.  In  reality  it  is  only  where  he  is  speaking  of 
insulated  stars  that  he  quotes  the  earlier  paper.  So  soon 
as  he  deals  with  aggregations  of  stars,  though  he  refers  to 
the  star-gauges  of  1785  he  no  longer  explains  them  as  of 
yore.  He  dwells  afresh  on  what  he  had  written  in  1802 
respecting  the  clustering  condition  of  portions  of  the  stellar 
heavens.  He  explains  that  his  expression  "forming 
clusters  "  was  "  used  to  denote  that  some  peculiar  arrange- 
ment of  stars  in  lines  making  different  angles,  directed  to 
a  certain  aggregation  of  a  few  central  stars,  suggested  the 
idea  that  they"  (the  former)  "might  be  in  a  state  of 
progressive  approach  to  them"  (the  latter).*  "This  tendency 
to  clustering  seems  chiefly  to  be  visible  in  places  extremely 
rich  in  stars.  In  order,  therefore,  to  investigate  the 
existence  of  a  clustering  power,  we  may  expect  its  effects 
to  be  most  visible  in  and  near  the  Milky  Way.''  I  would 
invite  the  reader's  special  attention  to  the  circumstance 
that  the  Milky  Way  is  here  pointedly  referred  to  as  a 
stellar  region  distinct  in  its  characteristics  from  the  region 
of  the  stars  forming  our  constellations.  In  studying 

*  We  may  notice  here,  again,  a  certain  inexactness  in  Herschel's 
manner  of  writing,  accounting,  perhaps,  for  the  extent  to  which  he  has 
too  often  been  misinterpreted. 


Star-  Gauging.  277 

Herschel's  papers  we  have  continually  to  be  on  the  watch 
for  indications  of  the  sort,  and  although  this  particular 
view  is  not  new,  since  he  had  expressed  the  same  opinion 
in  1802,  yet  as  Herschel  was  now  very  near  the  close  of  his 
observing  career,  it  is  important  to  notice  that  in  this  critical 
respect  he  retained  the  views  which  he  had  adopted  in 
1802. 

Thirty  years  had  now  passed  since  Herschel  had 
enunciated  his  first  method  of  star-gauging,  and  as  yet  we 
have  found  no  indication  of  a  second  method.  But  at  the 
close  of  this  paper  of  1814  he  mentions  a  new  mode  of 
research,  by  which  he  hoped  to  determine  the  laws 
according  to  which  the  stellar  universe  is  constructed. 
"The  extended  views  I  have  taken,"  he  says,  "in  this  and 
my  former  papers,  of  the  various  parts  that  enter  into  the 
construction  of  the  heavens,  have  prepared  the  way  for  a 
final  investigation  of  the  universal  arrangement  of  all  these 
celestial  bodies  in  space  ;  but  as  I  am  still  engaged  in  a 
series  of  observations  for  ascertaining  a  scale  whereby  the 
extent  of  the  universe,  as  far  as  it  is  possible  for  ILS  to  pene- 
trate into  space,  may  be  fathomed,  I  shall  conclude  this 
paper  by  pointing  out  some  inferences  which  the  continua- 
tion of  the  action  of  the  clustering  power  enables  us  to 
draw  from  the  observations  that  have  been  given. " 

We  find  Herschel,  then,  in  1814,  preparing  a  scale 
whereby  to  gauge  the  extent  of  the  universe,  "  as  far  as  it 
is  possible  for  us  to  penetrate  into  space." 

But  in  1814,  Herschel  reached  his  seventy-sixth  year, 
and  itw  as  scarcely  to  be  anticipated  that  he  would  live 


2  78  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

to  complete  in  its  entirety  the  task  he  had  entered  upon 
so  late  in  his  career — the  most  stupendous  task  which 
any  astronomer  had  ever  thought  of  undertaking.  In 
1784  and  1785  he  believed  that  he  had  something  finite 
to  deal  with ;  his  telescopes  reached,  as  he  supposed,  to  the 
limits  of  the  galaxy ;  he  had  but  to  gauge,  by  counting 
stars  in  field  after  field,  to  ascertain  the  shape  of 
the  sidereal  system.  Moreover  he  was  then  in  the 
prime  of  life.  Now,  in  his  old  age,  the  stellar  system 
had  widened  on  his  view.  Infinitely  more  complex  than 
he  had  supposed,  unfathomable  (in  parts  at  least  of  its 
extent)  even  with  his  mightiest  instruments — how  was  he 
to  hope  in  the  few  years  remaining  to  him,  to  solve  the 
mighty  problem  with  which  he  alone  of  all  men  who  had 
ever  lived  had  dared  to  grapple  ? 

There  was  no  shrinking  on  his  part,  however,  from  the 
tremendous  task  which  lay  before  him.  Be  did  not  even 
allow  himself  to  attack  the  work  hurriedly.  Thoughtfully 
he  prepared  the  scale  (the  new  method  of  gauging  of  which 
he  had  spoken  in  1814),  and  not  until  1817  did  he 
describe  the  plan  in  detail  and  with  illustrative  instances 
of  its  application. 

The  reader  may  be  prepared,  after  what  has  been  said 
at  the  beginning  of  this  paper,  to  find  the  new  method 
differing  little  from  the  method  of  1 784.  He  may  think 
that,  since  the  two  methods  have  been  confounded 
together  by  many,  perhaps  the  second  is  the  same  as  the 
first,  but  applied  on  a  larger  scale  and  with  higher  powers, 
or  if  different  from  the  other  is  still  closely  related  to  it. 


Star-Ganging.  279 

So  far,  however,  is  this  from  being  the  case,  that  the 
methods  may  be  described  as  not  only  unlike,  but  even 
antithetical  to  each  other. 

In  the  first  method  the  same  telescope  was  to  be  applied 
successively  to  different  parts  of  the  heavens ;  in  the 
second  the  same  part  of  the  heavens  was  to  be  examined 
successively  with  different  telescopes.  In  the  first 
method  the  stars  in  each  field  were  to  be  counted ;  in  the 
second,  the  observer  was  to  note  simply  to  what  degree  the 
telescopes  successively  employed  separated  from  each 
other  the  component  stars  brought  into  view, — or,  in 
technical  terms,  to  what  degree  the  telescope  effected  the 
resolution  of  the  stars  in  each  field. 

It  seems  to  me  tolerably  clear  that  up  to  the  year  1814, 
and  possibly  for  a  year  or  two  longer,  Herschel  had  been 
steadily  advancing  towards  new  and  wider  truths  respect- 
ing the  universe,  and  that  the  new  method  of  star- gauging, 
as  it  first  presented  itself  to  his  mind,  was  a  well-con- 
sidered means  of  attacking  the  great  problem  in  the  en- 
larged form  to  which  it  had  grown.  It  is  manifest  that  the 
higher  the  telescopic  power  we  employ,  the  farther  do  we 
penetrate  into  the  spaces  surrounding  us  on  all  sides.  It 
is,  of  course,  probable  (or  rather  it  is  certain)  that  many 
objects  visible  with  a  lower  telescopic  power  may  lie 
farther  away  than  others  brought  into  view  with  a  higher 
power,  because  a  very  large  star  is  visible  from  beyond 
depths  which  suffice  to  hide  smaller  but  nearer  orbs.  Yet 
unless  we  assume  that  there  are  limits  beyond  which  none 
of  the  larger  stars  exist,  it  is  clear  that  each  increase  of 


280  Our  Place  among  Infinities, 

telescopic  power,  by  bringing  into  view  new  members  of 
these  larger  orders,  must  carry  our  vision  beyond  the 
limits  which  it  had  before  reached.  And  if  we  wish  to 
form  just  conceptions  of  the  structure  of  the  universe,  it 
seems  manifest  that  our  best,  in  fact  our  only  available 
first  step  towards  such  knowledge,  is  to  ascertain  the 
aspect  of  the  space  surrounding  us,  as  viewed  with 
gradually  increasing  powers  of  vision.  This,  as  I  judge, 
was  what  Herschel  proposed  when,  in  1814,  he  spoke  of 
"fathoming  the  extent  of  the  universe,  so  far  as  it  is 
possible  for  us  to  penetrate  into  space." 

But  it  is  certain  that  the  plan,  as  he  began  to  carry  it 
out  in  1817  and  1818,  does  not  correspond  with  this 
description.  Nor  does  Herschel  appear,  in  my  judgment, 
to  have  worked  in  these  years  with  his  former  skill  and 
acumen.  Power  was  not  wanting,  but  there  is  no 
longer  the  elasticity  which  hitherto  had  been  so  marked  a 
characteristic  of  Herschel's  mind.  I  think,  too,  that  it  will 
become  manifest  to  anyone  who  carefully  studies  the 
whole  series  of  Herschel's  papers,  that  when  he  wrote 
these  last  two,  the  great  array  of  facts  which  he  had  been 
so  long  engaged  in  gathering  together  was  no  longer 
present  in  its  entirety  to  his  mind.  It  must  not  be  held 
to  involve  irreverence  towards  the  greatest  astronomer  the 
world  has  known,  to  suppose  that  in  his  seventy-ninth  and 
eightieth  years  his  mental  powers  were  not  so  great  as  they 
had  been,  and  especially  that  his  memory  began  to  fail 
for  facts  observed  during  the  preceding  ten  or  twelve  years 
of  his  life,  Assuredly  no  honest  student  of  science  should 


Star-  Gauging.  2  8 1 

allow  his  respect  for  the  work  of  HerschePs  former  years 
to  cause  him  to  overlook  defects,  if  such  exist,  in  the 
reasoning  with  which  Herschel's  latest  observations  were 
accompanied. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  show  that  his  reasoning  in  1817 
and  1818  was  no  longer  so  sound  as  in  former  years.  He 
was  now  applying,  be  it  remembered,  a  process  by  which 
he  hoped  to  determine  the  relative  distances  of  star-groups. 
Supposing  that  a  particular  clustering  aggregation  began 
to  be  resolved  into  discrete  stars  with  a  certain  telescopic 
power,  and  was  entirely  resolved  when  a  certain  higher 
power  was  employed,  there  would  be  pnmd  facie  evidence 
as  to  the  distance  of  the  aggregation — because,  given  a 
group  of  stars  of  certain  sizes  and  set  at  certain  distances 
from  each  other,  it  is  manifest  that  the  farther  away  that 
group  is  placed  the  higher  will  be  the  telescopic  powers 
required  (1)  to  begin,  and  (2)  to  complete  the  resolution  of 
that  group  into  separate  stars.  But  although  such  con- 
siderations may  be  reasonable  enough  when  we  are  com- 
paring two  groups  together,  and  even  within  certain  limits 
when  applied  to  different  parts  of  the  same  group,  there 
are  circumstances  under  which  their  application  to  partic- 
ular star-groups  would  be  altogether  incorrect,  and  which 
shew  also  how  unsafe  the  general  principle  is  on  which 
this  particular  method  of  star-gauging  depends. 

In  order  to  shew  this,  I  will  take  as  a  typical  instance 
a  splendid  pair  of  star-groups  (not  clusters  properly  so 
called)  which  adorn  the  uplifted  hand  of  The  Eescuer, 
quoting  Prof.  Nich.ol's  account  of  Herschel's  study  of  this 


282  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

remarkable  object : — '  In  the  Milky  Way,'  lie  says, 
'  thronged  all  over  with  splendours,  there  is  one  portion 
not  unnoticed  by  the  general  observer,  the  spot  in  the 
sword-hand  of  Perseus.  That  spot  shews  no  stars  to  the 
eye  ;  the  milky  light,  which  glorifies  it,  comes  from  regions 
to  which  unaided  we  cannot  pierce.  But  to  a  telescope  of 
considerable  power*  the  space  appears  lighted  up  with 
unnumbered  orbs  ;  a#d  these  pass  on  through  the  depths 
of  the  infinite,  until,  even  to  that  penetrating  glass,  they 
escape  all  scrutiny,  withdrawing  into  regions  unvisited 
by  its  power.  Shall  we  adventure  into  these  deeper 
retirements  ?  Then,  assume  an  instrument  of  higher 
efficacy,  and  lo  !  the  change  is  only  repeated  ;  those  scarce 
observed  before  appear  as  large  orbs,  and  behind,  a  new 
series  begins,  again  shading  gradually  away,  leading 
towards  farther  mysteries !  The  illustrious  Herschel 
penetrated  on  one  occasion  into  this  spot,  until  he  found 
himself  among  depths  whose  light  could  not  have  reached 
him  in  much  less  than  four  thousand  years  :  no  marvel 
that  he  withdrew  from  the  pursuit,  conceiving  that  such 
abysses  must  be  endless  ! '  The  younger  Herschel,  speak- 
ing of  instances  such  as  these,  where  telescope  after 
telescope  has  been  directed  to  the  same  spot  without 
apparently  reaching  its  limits,  says  that  here  'we  are 
compelled  by  the  clearest  evidence  the  telescope  can  afford 
to  believe  that  star-strown  vistas  lie  open,  exhausting  their 
powers  and  stretching  out  beyond  their  utmost  reach, 
as  is  proved  by  infinite  increase  of  number  and  diminu- 
*  A  good  opera-glass  shows  abundant  stars  in  this  wonderful  group. 


Star-Gauging.  283 

tion  of  magnitude,  terminating  in  complete  irresolvable 
nebulosity.' 

It  was  thus  that  the  elder  Herschel  interpreted  these 
wondrously  rich  spots  in  the  papers  of  1817  and  1818. 
Followed  as  he  has  been  in  this  interpretation  by  Sir  John 
Herschel,  Struve,  Grant,  Nichol,  and  others,  it  may  seem 
incredible  that  an  argument  practically  resistless  opposes 
itself  to  such  a  conclusion.  Yet  there  is  such  an  argu- 
ment ;  nor  has  its  strength  ever  been  impeached  or  even 
questioned. 

Eepeatedly  in  his  earlier  papers,  Sir  W.  Herschel  had 
noted  the  probability,  rising  almost  to  certainty  in  each 
individual  case,  and  absolutely  certain  for  many  cases, 
that  groups  of  stars  which  are  rounded  in  appearance  are 
roughly  globular  in  reality,  and  that  groups  markedly 
distinct  by  their  richness  from  surrounding  parts  of  the 
star-sphere  are  really  distinct  as  to  richness  from  surround- 
ing parts  of  interstellar  space.  If  we  consider  the  very 
group  in  Perseus  which  Herschel,  as  we  have  seen, 
regarded  otherwise— or  as  a  star-region  extending  away 
and  away  into  space,  along  the  track  over  which  his 
telescopes  of  greater  and  greater  power  had  carried  him — 
we  shall  find  abundant  reason  for  that  earlier  interpreta- 
tion. The  group  is  much  smaller  in  apparent  size  than 
the  moon,  but  for  the  sake  of  argument  imagine  it  as 
large.  Conceive  a  cone  having  the  eye  as  apex  and  just 
large  enough  to  enclose  the  moon,  extending  out 
into  space  towards  the  great  double  cluster.  Then, 
whatever  else  we  may  be  in  doubt  about,  we  know 
18 


284  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

quite  certainly  that  the  whole  star  region  examined  by 
Herschel  is  enclosed  within  that  long  tapering  cone.  If  his 
later  principle  of  interpretation  is  just,  the  brighter  and, 
as  he  judged,  the  nearer  stars  of  the  cluster  are  so  far 
away  within  this  cone,  that  their  light  takes  about  a 
hundred  years  in  reaching  us — but  say  two  hundred 
years  to  favour  his  interpretation  (as  will  immediately 
appear)  as  far  as  possible.  The  farther  parts,  we  have  seen, 
he  regarded,  on  the  same  principle,  as  so  far  away  that  their 
light  takes  4000  years  in  reaching  us,  or  twenty  times  as 
long.  How  much  farther  the  star-region  extends  (on  this 
interpretation)  we  do  not  know.  But  here  we  have  the 
farthest  known  part,  twenty  times  as  far  away  as  the  nearest. 
Now,  if  any  one  will  make  a  very  taper  cone  of  paper  (it 
should  be  a  yard  high  if  its  base  is  only  a  third  of  an  inch 
in  diameter,  or  three  yards  high  for  a  one-inch  base),  and 
will  cut  off  a  twentieth  part  of  its  length,  from  the  apex, 
the  remaining  part  will  show  the  shape  of  the  region  of 
space  occupied,  according  to  the  interpretation  of  1818, 
by  the  stars  of  the  rich  cluster.  The  paper  frustum  (still 
nearly  a  yard  high,  if  the  first  of  the  above-mentioned 
sizes  be  adopted,  and  at  its  thickest  part  only  a  third 
of  an  inch  wide),  is,  indeed,  immensely  exaggerated  in 
width,  long  and  slender  though  it  seems.  That  wonderful 
group  of  stars,  then,  forms  in  reality,  if  rightly  interpreted 
by  Herschel  in  1818,  a  long,  thin,  almost  cylindrical 
array  of  stars,  happening  by  a  singular  chance  to  have  its 
length  directed  exactly  towards  our  earth  !  As  there  are 
two  clusters,  indeed,  there  are  two  such  ononnously  long 


Star-Gauging.  285 

and  slender  arrays,  thus  strangely  adjusted !  And  all 
other  similar  cases — of  which  Herschel  cites  no  less  than 
ten,  while  many  others  were  recognized  by  his  son  in  the 
southern  Milky  Way — must  be  similarly  interpreted. 

The  objections  to  such  an  inference  are  manifest ;  and  in 
corresponding  cases  Sir  W.  Herschel  had  clearly  recog- 
nized them.  Note  again,  how  Sir  John  Herschel  disposes 
of  such  conceptions  as  being  utterly  improbable  in  the 
much  less  marked  case  of  the  two  Magellanic  Clouds. 
'  Were  there  but  one  such  object,'  he  says,  '  it  might  be 
maintained  without  utter  improbability  that  its  apparent 
sphericity  is  only  an  effect  of  foreshortening  ;  but  such  an 
adjustment,  improbable  enough  in  one  case,  must  be 
rejected  as  too  much  so  for  fair  argument  in  two.' 
How  much  more,  therefore,  in  the  multitudinous  instances 
presented  by  the  clustering  aggregations  of  the  Milky 
Way. 

The  inference  clearly  is,  then,  that  where  Herschel 
had  supposed  (in  1817  and  1818)  that  he  was  fathoming, 
or  attempting  to  fathom,  the  depths  of  stellar  space,  he 
was  in  reality  only  scrutinising  more  and  more  closely,  as 
higher  and  higher  powers  were  employed,  one  and  the 
same  region  occupied  by  many  orders  of  stars — from  suns 
perhaps  surpassing  our  own  many  times  in  volume,  down 
to  orbs  which,  large  though  they  may  be  absolutely,  must 
relatively  be  regarded  as  mere  star-dust.  I  do  not  speak 
of  this  conclusion  as  doubtful,  for  it  appears  to  me 
demonstrated.  As  the  elder  Herschel  spoke  of  the  two 
great  clustering  regions  of  Cygnus  as  spherical  in  shape,  as 


286  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

the  younger  Herschel  spoke  similarly  of  the  Magellanic 
Clouds,  so  may  we  justly  say  of  these  regions  which  had 
been  regarded  as  the  fathomless  parts  of  our  stellar 
system,  that  demonstrably  they  are  '  island  star-systems,' 
infinitely  rich  in  stars,  and  infinitely  varied  in  structure. 
We  may  indeed  apply  to  them  the  very  words  which  Sir 
John  Herschel  applied  on  sufficient  but  far  weaker 
evidence  to  the  Magellanic  Clouds, '  it  must  be  taken  as  a 
demonstrated  fact  that  stars  of  the  seventh  and  eighth 
magnitude,  and  irresolvable  nebula'  (not  nebulae]  'may 
coexist  within  limits  of  distance  not  differing  more  than  as 
9  to  10.'  The  caution  which  this  discovery  should  inspire 
when  we  are  dealing  with  other  cases  where  the  evidence 
is  less  simple,  need  hardly  be  insisted  upon. 

Both  methods  of  star-gauging  had  been  tried,  then, 
when  Herschel  ceased  from  his  labours,  and  in  one  sense 
both  had  failed.  It  had  been  at  least  demonstrated  that 
the  principles  by  which  Herschel  had  hoped  to  be  able  to 
interpret  either  method,  were  unsound.  He  himself 
established  the  fact  that  the  stars  are  not  spread  through- 
out our  system  with  such  an  approach  to  uniformity  that 
one  can  estimate  the  extension  of  the  system  in  different 
directions  by  counting  the  stars  which  a  single  powerful 
telescope  brings  into  view.  He  also  collected  the  materials 
which  prove  that  we  cannot  hope  to  estimate  the  distances 
of  different  parts  of  the  system  by  testing  with  different 
telescopes  the  degree  of  stellar  resolvability  in  those  parts. 

Is,  then,  the  problem  altogether  hopeless  ?  It  seems 
to  me  that  it  is  very  far  from  being  so,  and  that  even 


Star-  Gauging .  287 

where  Herschel's  methods  seemed  to  fail  they  afford 
excellent  promise  of  success.  His  first  method,  for  ex- 
ample, had  to  be  abandoned  so  far  as  his  original  purpose 
was  concerned,  because  he  found  reason  to  believe  that 
the  great  rich  regions  of  the  Milky  Way  are  situated  like 
great  clouds  of  stars  in  space,  and  are  not  mere  ranges  of 
stars  extending  continuously  from  our  own  neighbourhood. 
But  it  was  the  method  itself  which  taught  this, — which, 
in  fact,  effected  this  capital  discovery.  The  second 
method,  again,  cannot  be  interpreted  as  Herschel  hoped. 
It  cannot  tell  us  how  far  off,  relatively,  are  different  star- 
groups.  But  this  application  of  the  method  has  to  be 
abandoned  simply  because  the  use  of  the  method  itself 
has  taught  us  that  the  architecture  of  the  heavens  is  far 
too  complex  to  be  interpreted  in  so  simple  a  manner. 
Here  then  is  another  great  discovery  effected  by  a  method 
of  star-gauging  which,  so  far  as  its  original  purpose  was 
concerned,  has  had  to  be  rejected.  We  have  learned, 
from  the  seeming  failure  of  the  two  methods,  two  import- 
ant and  interesting  facts — first,  that  the  stars  are  gathered 
into  certain  regions  of  space,  and  segregated  from  others  ; 
and,  secondly,  that  where  stars  are  so  gathered  they  exist  in 
many  orders  of  real  magnitude,  and  are  spread  in  different 
parts  of  such  aggregations  with  very  different  degrees 
of  profusion.  Furthermore,  over  and  above  these  valuable 
deductions,  we  have  the  observations  themselves  still 
available  for  use  in  other  ways,  still  ready  to  reward 
whoever  shall  devote  close  and  attentive  scrutiny  to  them. 
But  it  appears  to  me  that  so  soon  as  we  recognize  the 


288  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

success  of  both  methods  in  one  sense,  and  their  failure 
in  another,  a  method  of  research  suggests  itself  which 
promises  to  combine  all  those  qualities  of  each  method 
which  can  really  be  trusted,  and  to  be  open  to  no 
objections.  It  was  a  grand  idea  of  Herschel's  to  deter- 
mine the  varying  richness  of  the  heavens  in  different 
directions  under  the  scrutiny  of  one  powerful  telescope. 
It  was  an  equally  noble  occupation  to  watch  the  heavens 
"widening  on  man's  view"  with  the  widening  pupil  of 
the  telescopic  eye.  Each  method  of  research  proved 
effective  as  used  separately.  But  only  by  combining  the 
two  can  the  secret  of  the  star-depths  be  mastered.  We 
must  not  limit  ourselves,  however,  to  the  study  of  a  star- 
field  here  and  a  star-field  there.  With  each  telescopic 
power  employed,  the  whole  heavens  must  be  surveyed. 
The  results  obtained  with  each  power  must  be  compared 
together,  after  being  carefully  indicated  in  suitable  charts 
(since  the  most  powerful  intellect  cannot  grasp  those  results 
presented  merely  as  statistics).  Differential  charts,  shewing 
by  how  much  each  increase  of  power  increases  in  each  region 
of  the  heavens  the  number  of  stars  brought  into  view, 
must  also  be  constructed.  No  preconceived  opinions  must 
be  suffered  to  mar  the  teaching  thus  obtained ;  but  the 
architecture  of  the  heavens  so  disclosed  must  be  viewed 
precisely  as  it  is  presented  to  us  by  these  results :  because 
then,  though  it  may  be  far  too  complex  for  our  compre- 
hension, we  shall  be  less  likely  to  be  deceived  than  if  we 
were  prepared  beforehand  to  recognize  in  it  certain 
characteristic  features. 


Star-Gauging.  289 

This  is  a  work  in  which  almost  every  student  of 
astronomy  can  help.  Gaugings  with  small  telescopes 
should  by  no  means  be  neglected.  Indeed,  when  we  re- 
member that  the  structure  of  the  stellar  universe  is  so 
complex  and  varied  that  some  of  the  nearer  parts  cannot 
be  analysed  to  their  inmost  recesses,  even  by  the  most 
powerful  telescopes  yet  constructed,  we  see  that  our 
information  about  these  parts  can  alone  be  brought  near  to 
completeness,  and  it  is  precisely  about  these  parts  that 
the  smaller  telescopes  can  give  the  most  useful  informa- 
tion. 

I  believe  there  is  a  great  future  for  that  noble  domain  of 
astronomy  which  Sir  W.  Herschel  made  the  chief  object 
of  his  study.  By  such  methods  of  star-gauging  as  I  have 
indicated — by  the  application  of  spectroscopy  to  distin- 
guish the  stars  into  their  various  orders  as  respects 
physical  structure — by  the  careful  analysis  of  stellar 
motions,  in  order  to  recognize  the  laws  of  association — and 
by  other  methods  of  research,  the  stupendous  problem 
presented  by  the  stellar  heavens  may  be  hopefully  attacked ; 
and  even  should  the  observations  directed  to  its  solution 
fail,  so  far  as  their  main  purpose  is  concerned,  there  can 
yet  be  no  manner  of  doubt  that  the  collected  results  will 
be  full  of  value  and  interest. 


SATURN  AND  THE  SABBATH  OF  THE  JEWS 

IN  one  of  the  most  striking  passages  of  his  "Study  of 
Sociology,"  Herbert  Spencer  considers  what  might  be  said 
of  our  age  "  by  an  independent  observer  living  in  the  far 
future,  supposing  his  statements  translated  into  our 
cumbrous  language." 

" '  In  some  respects,'  says  the  future  observer,  '  their  code  of 
conduct  seems  not  to  have  advanced  beyond,  but  to  have  gone  back 
from  the  code  of  a  still  more  ancient  people  from  whom  their  creed 
was  derived  .  .  .  The  relations  of  their  creed  to  the  creed  of  this 
ancient  people  are  indeed  difficult  to  understand.  .  .  Not  only  did 
they,  in  the  law  of  retaliation,  outdo  the  Jews,  instead  of  obeying 
the  quite  opposite  principle  of  the  teacher  they  worshipped  as  divine, 
but  they  obeyed  the  Jewish  law,  and  disobeyed  their  divine  teacher 
in  other  ways, — as  in  the  rigid  observance  of  every  seventh  day, 
which  he  had  deliberately  discountenanced  .  .  .  Their  substantial 
adhesion  to  the  creed  they  professedly  repudiated,  was  clearly 
demonstrated  by  this,  that  in  each  of  their  temples  they  fixed  up  in 
some  conspicuous  place  the  Ten  Commandments  of  the  Jewish 
religion,  while  they  rarely,  if  ever,  fixed  up  the  two  Christian 
Commandments  given  instead  of  them.  And  yet,'  says  the  reporter, 
after  dilating  on  these  strange  facts,  '  though  the  English  were 
greatly  given  to  missionary  enterprises  of  all  kinds,  and  though  I 
sought  diligently  among  the  records  of  these,  I  could  find  no  trace 
of  a  society  for  converting  the  English  people  from  Judaism  to 
Christianity.' " 

It  is,  indeed,  a  strange  circumstance  that  Christian 
teachings  in  our  time  respecting  the  observance  of  each 


Saturn  and  the  Sabbath  of  the  Jews.      291 

seventh  day,  should  be  at  variance,  not  only  with  what  is 
known  of  the  origin  of  the  observance  of  Sunday,  as 
distinguished  from  the  Sabbath  of  the  Jews,  but  even 
more  emphatically  with  the  teachings  of  Christ,  both  as 
to  the  purpose  of  a  day  of  rest,  and  as  to  the  manner  in 
which  the  poor  should  be  considered.  Our  Sunday  is  in 
fact,  if  not  in  origin,  the  Sabbath  of  the  Jews,  not  the 
Lord's  Day  of  the  Apostles  ;  it  is  regarded,  not  as  a  day 
set  apart  to  refresh  those  who  toil,  but  as  though  man 
were  made  for  its  observance  ;  while  the  soul-wearying 
gloom  of  the  day  is  so  ordered  as  to  affect  chiefly  the 
poorer  classes,  who  want  rest  from  work  and  anxiety, 
not  rest  from  the  routine  of  social  amusements,  which 
are  unknown  to  them.  But  although  the  thoroughly  non- 
Christian  nature  of  our  seventh  day  is  remarkable  in  a 
country  professedly  Christian,  and  although  it  is  a  serious 
misfortune  for  us  that  an  arrangement  which  might  be 
most  beneficial  to  the  working  classes  is  rendered  mis- 
chievous by  the  way  in  which  it  is  carried  out,  I  certainly 
have  no  purpose  here  to  discuss  the  vexed  question  of 
Sunday  observance.  There  are  some  points,  however, 
suggested  by  Spencer's  reference  to  the  origin  of  our 
weekly  resting  day,  which  are  even  more  curious  than 
those  on  which  he  touches.  We  take  our  law  of  weekly 
rest  from  Moses  ;  we  practically  follow  Jewish  observances 
in  this  matter  :  but  in  this,  except  in  so  far  as  the  contrast 
between  Judaism  and  Christianity  is  concerned,  there  is 
nothing  incongruous.  For  the  Jewish  nation  was  of  old 
the  sole  Eastern  nation  whose  priesthood  taught  the 


292  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

worship  of  one  God,  and  resisted  the  tendency  of  their 
people  to  worship  the  gods  of  other  nations.  But  the  real 
origin  of  the  Jewish  Sabbath  was  far  more  singular.  The 
observance  was  derived  from  an  Egyptian,  and  primarily 
from  a  Chaldeean  source.  Moreover,  an  astrological  origin 
may  be  recognized  in  the  practice ;  rest  being  enjoined  by 
Egyptian  priests  on  the  seventh  day,  simply  because  they 
regarded  that  day  as  a  dies  infaustus,  when  it  was  unlucky 
to  undertake  any  work. 

It  needs  no  very  elaborate  reasoning  to  prove  that  the 
Jewish  observance  of  the  Sabbath  began  during  the  sojourn 
in  Egypt.  Without  entering  into  the  difficult  question  of 
the  authorship  and  date  of  the  Pentateuch,  we  can  perceive 
that  the  history  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  in  the 
Elohistic  portion  of  the  narrative,  is  introductory  to  the 
account  of  the  Jews'  sojourn  in  Egypt  and  exodus  thence 
under  their  skilful  and  prudent  commander,  Moses.  It  is 
incredible  that  the  person  who  combined  these  two 
accounts  into  one  history,  including  an  exact  record  of  the 
rules  for  observing  festivals,  should  have  failed  to  add 
some  reference  to  the  seventh  day  of  rest  when  quoting 
(from  the  Elohist)  the  ordinances  which  Abraham  and  the 
other  patriarchs  were  so  carefully  enjoined  to  obey,  if  it 
really  had  been'  a  point  of  duty  in  patriarchal  times  to 
keep  holy  the  seventh  day.  In  every  injunction  to  the 
Israelites  after  they  left  Egypt,  the  duty  of  keeping  the 
Sabbath  is  strongly  dwelt  upon.  It  not  only  became  from 
this  time  one  of  the  commandments,  but  "  a  sign  between 
the  Lord  and  the  children  of  Israel  for  ever."  In  the 


Saturn  and  the  Sabbath  of  the  Jews.      293 

patriarchal  times,  on  the  contrary,  we  find  no  mention  of 
it :  the  test  of  righteousness  was  the  worship  of  one  God — 
the  God  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob.  In  the  book  of 
Job,  again,  no  reference  whatever  is  made  to  the  ob- 
servance of  the  Sabbath  ;  and  this  is  the  more  remarkable 
because  Job  makes  "solemn  protestation  of  his  integrity  "  in 
several  duties.  He  claims  integrity  in  the  worship  of  God ; 
"  If  I  beheld  the  sun  when  it  shined,"  he  says,  "  or  the 
moon  walking  in  brightness,  and  my  heart  hath  been 
secretly  enticed,  or  my  mouth  hath  kissed  my  hand  "  (the 
token  of  worship),  "this  also  were  an  iniquity  to  be 
punished  by  the  judge  :  for  I  should  have  denied  the  God 
that  is  above."  But  he  says  no  word  about  the  observance 
which,  after  the  exodus,  is  so  specially  associated  with  the 
worship  of  God. 

It  is,  indeed,  somewhat  singular  that  the  observance  of 
the  Sabbath  should  be  derived  from  far  remoter  times,  by 
those  who  insist  on  the  literal  exactness  of  the  Bible 
record,  seeing  that  the  Bible  distinctly  assigns  the  exodus 
from  Egypt  as  the  epoch  when  the  observance  had  its 
origin.  For  Moses,  in  solemnly  reminding  all  Israel  of 
the  covenant  in  Horeb,  says  : — 

"  Remember  that  thou  wast  a  servant  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  and 
that  the  Lord  thy  God  brought  thee  out  thence,  through  a  mighty 
hand  and  by  a  stretched-out  arm :  therefore  the  Lord  thy  God  com- 
manded thee  to  keep  the  Sabbath-day." — (Deut.  v.  15). 

And  these  words  occupy  the  position  in  the  Fourth  Com- 
mandment, which,  in  Exodus  xx.  11,  is  occupied  by  the 
orcls,  'For  in  six  days  the  Lord  made  heaven  and  earth,'  &c. 


294  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

Assigning  the  origin  of  the  first  Jewish  observance  of 
the  Sabbath  to  the  time  of  the  exodus,  we  are  forced  to 
the  conclusion  that  the  custom  of  keeping  each  seventh 
day  as  a  day  of  rest  was  derived  from  the  people  amongst 
whom  the  Jews  had  been  sojourning  more  than  two 
hundred  years.  It  is  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  Moses 
would  have  added  to  the  almost  overwhelming  difficulties 
which  he  had  to  encounter  in  dealing  with  the  obstinate 
people  he  led  from  Egypt,  the  task  of  establishing  a  new 
festival.  Such  a  task  is  at  all  times  difficult,  but  at  the 
time  of  the  exodus  it  would  have  been  hopeless  to  under- 
take it.  The  people  were  continually  rebelling  against 
Moses,  because  he  sought  to  turn  them  from  the  worship 
of  the  gods  of  Egypt,  in  whom  they  were  disposed  to  trust. 
It  was  no  time  to  establish  a  new  festival,  unless  one  could 
be  devised  which  should  correspond  with  the  customs 
they  had  learned  in  Egypt.  Moses  would  seem  indeed  to 
have  pursued  a  course  of  compromise.*  Opposing  man- 

*  There  is  a  passage  in  Jeremiah  which,  as  it  seems  to  me,  cannot 
otherwise  be  reconciled  with  the  Pentateuch — viz.,  chapter  vii.  21-23, 
where  he  says,  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord  of  Hosts,  the  God  of  Israel ;  Put 
your  burnt-offerings  unto  your  sacrifices,  and  eat  flesh.  For  I  spake 
not  unto  your  fathers,  nor  commanded  them  in  the  day  that  I  brought 
them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  concerning  burnt-offerings  or  sacrifices : 
but  this  thing  commanded  I  them,  saying,  Obey  uiy  voice,  and  I  will 
be  your  God,  and  ye  shall  be  my  people  ;  and  walk  ye  in  all  the  ways 
that  I  have  commanded  you,  that  it  may  be  well  unto  you."  It  seems 
plainly  intimated  here  that  (in  Jeremiah's  opinion,  at  any  rate)  the 
ordinances  relating  to  burnt-offerings  and  sacrifices  on  the  Sabbath  and 
new  moons  were  not  commanded  by  God,  however  plainly  the  account 
in  the  Pentateuch  may  seem  to  suggest  the  contrary ;  and  the  two 
accounts  can  scarcely  be  reconciled  except  by  supposing  that  the  Mosaic 
laws  on  these  points  were  intended  to  regulate  and  also  to  sanction  an 
observance  not  originally  instituted  by  Moses. 


Saturn  and  the  Sabbath  of  the  Jews.      295 

fully  the  worship  of  the  Egyptian  gods,  he  adopted,  never- 
theless, Egyptian  ceremonies  and  festivals,  only  so  far 
modifying  them  that  (as  he  explained  them)  they  ceased 
to  be  associated  with  the  worship  of  false  gods. 

We  have  also  historical  evidence  as  to  the  non-Jewish 
origin  of  the  observance  of  the  seventh  day,  as  decisive 
as  the  arguments  I  have  been  considering.  For  Philo- 
Judaeus,  Josephus,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and  others, 
speak  plainly  of  the  week  as  not  of  Jewish  origin,  but 
common  to  all  the  Oriental  nations.  I  do  not  wish,  how- 
ever, to  make  use  of  such  evidence  here,  important  though 
it  is — or  rather  because  it  is  so  important  that  it  could 
not  properly  be  dealt  with  in  the  space  available  to  me. 
I  wish  to  consider  only  the  evidence  which  lies  directly 
before  us  in  the  Bible  pages,  combining  it  with  the  astro- 
nomical, relations  which  are  involved  in  the  question. 
For  it  is  to  an  astronomical  or  rather  an  astrological 
interpretation  that  we  are  led,  so  soon  as  we  recognise 
the  non-Jewish  origin  of  the  Sabbath.  Beyond  all  doubt, 
the  week  is  an  astronomical  period,  and  that  in  a  two-fold 
sense  ;  it  is  first  a  rough  sub-division  of  the  lunar  month, 
and  in  the  second  place  it  is  a  period  derived  directly 
from  the  number  of  celestial  bodies  known  to  ancient 
astronomers  as  moving  upon  the  sphere  of  the  fixed  stars. 

The  astronomical  origin  of  the  Sabbath  is  shown  by 
the  Mosaic  laws  as  to  festivals,  illustrated  by  occasional 
passages  in  other  parts  of  the  Bible.  In  the  28th  chapter 
of  Numbers  we  find  four  forms  of  sacrifice  to  be  offered  at 
regular  intervals — first  the  continual  burnt-offering  to  be 


296  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

made  at  sunrise  and  at  sunset  (these  epochs,  "be  it  noted, 
being  important  in  the  astrological  system  of  the 
Egyptians)  ;  secondly,  the  offering  on  the  Sabbath ; 
thirdly,  the  offering  in  the  time  of  the  new  moon ;  and 
fourthly,  the  offering  at  the  luui-solar  festival  of  the 
Passover.  That  is,  we  have  daily,  weekly,  monthly,  and 
yearly  offerings.  An  attempt  has  been  made  to  show  that 
in  the  beginning  of  the  Mosaic  rule  the  months  were  not 
lunar;  but,  apart  from  all  other  evidence,  repeated  re- 
ferences to  "  Sabbaths  and  new  moons"  negative  this  view, 
and  show  that  as  Spencer  (Hit.  iii  1)  maintains,  the 
Hebrews  began  their  month  when  the  new  moon  first 
appeared.  It  is  also  clear  from  the  nature  of  the  offerings 
made,  that  the  festival  of  the  new  moon  was  held  in  equal 
esteem  with  the  Sabbath ;  and  although  the  observances 
were  different,  yet  both  days  were  strictly  religious  in 
character.  For  when  the  Shunammite  woman  said  to  her 
husband  that  she  would  "run  to  the  man  of  God,"  he 
answers  (supposing  she  went  to  hear  the  sacred  books 
read),  "Wherefore  wilt  thou  go  to  him  to-day?  it  is  neither 
new  moon  nor  Sabbath."  And  again,  the  new  moon 
resembled  the  Sabbath  in  being  a  day  when  sale  was 
prohibited.  "  Hear  this,"  says  Amos,  "O  ye  that  swallow 
up  the  needy,  even  to  make  the  poor  of  the  land  to  fail, 
saying,  When  will  the  new  moon  be  gone,  that  we  may 
sell  corn  ?  and  the  Sabbath,  that  we  may  set  forth  wheat?" 
It  seems  also,  as  Tirin  has  pointed  out,  that  servile  work 
was  prohibited,  for  we  read  (1  Samuel  xx.  18,  19)  that 
Jonathan  said  to  David,  "  To-morrow  is  the  new  moon : 


Saturn  and  the  Sabbath  of  the  yews.      297 

and  thou  shalt  be  missed,  because  thy  seat  will  be  empty. 
And  when  thou  hast  stayed  three  days,  then  thou  shalt  go 
down  quickly,  and  come  to  the  place  where  thou  didst  hide 
thyself  when  the  business  was  in  hand"  or  as  in  the  Douay 
translation,  "  in  the  day  when  it  is  lawful  to  work."  * 

We  have  evidence  equally  clear  to  show  that  the  seven 
days  of  the  week  were  connected  with  the  seven  planets, 
that  is,  with  the  seven  celestial  bodies  which  appear  to 
move  among  the  stars.  It  was  by  no  mere  accidental 
agreement  between  the  number  of  the  days  and  the  number 
of  planets  that  so  many  of  the  Oriental  nations  were  led 
to  name  the  days  of  the  week  after  the  planets.  The 
arrangement  of  the  nomenclature  is  indeed  so  peculiar  that 
a  common  origin  for  the  practice  must  be  admitted,  when 
we  find  the  same  arrangement  adopted  by  nations  otherwise 
diverse  in  character  and  habits.  Moreover,  the  arrange- 
ment is  manifestly  associated  with  Sabaism  on  the  one 

*  Tirin  also  asserts  that  the  Jews  observed  the  lunar  system,  and 
that  their  months  consisted  of  29  and  30  days  alternately  (294  days, 
within  about  three-quarters  of  an  hour,  being  the  length  of  the  mean 
lunar  month).  Hence  the  feast  of  the  new  moon  came  to  be  called  the 
thirtieth  Sabbath,  that  is,  the  Sabbath,  of  the  thirtieth  day.  Thus 
Horace  (Sat.  I.  ix.)  "  flodie  tricesima  sabbata  :  vin'  tu  Curtis  Judaeis 
oppedere  ?  "  Macrobius  mentions  that  the  Greeks,  Komans,  Egyptians, 
Arabians,  &c.,  worshipped  the  moon  (Sat.  I.  xv.)  ?  and  it  is  probable  that 
despite  the  care  of  Moses  on  this  point,  the  Jews  were  prone  to  return 
to  the  moon-worship  whence  the  feast  of  the  new  moon  had  its  origin. 
We  must  not,  however,  infer  this  from  the  passage  in  Jeremiah  vii. 
17,  18,  "  Seest  thou  not  what  they  do  in  the  cities  of  Judah  and  in  the 
streets  of  Jerusalem  ?  The  children  gather  wood,  and  the  fathers  kindle, 
the  fire,  and  the  women  knead  their  dough,  to  make  cakes  to  the  queen 
of  heaven,  and  to  pour  out  drink-offerings  unto  other  gods."  For  the 
queen  of  heaven  is  Athor,  parent  of  the  universe. 


298  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

hand,  and  with  astrological  superstitions  on  the  other;  and 
we  find  the  clearest  evidence  in  the  Bible  not  only  that 
Sabaism  and  astrology  were  known  to  the  Jews,  but  that 
Moses  had  extreme  difficulty  in  separating  the  observances 
he  enjoined  (or  permitted  ?)  from  the  worship  of  the  Host 
of  Heaven.  He  was  learned,  we  know,  in  all  the  wisdom 
of  the  Egyptians  (Acts  vii  22),  and  therefore  he  must 
have  known  those  astronomical  facts,  and  have  been 
familiar  with  those  astrological  superstitions,  which  the 
Chaldaeans  had  imparted  to  the  Egyptians  of  the  days  of 
the  Pharaohs.*  It  is  noteworthy,  too,  that  the  first 
difficulties  he  met  with  in  the  exodus  arose  from  the  wish 
of  the  Jews  to  return  to  Sabaism.  This  is  not  manifest  in 
the  original  narrative;  but  the  real  meaning  of  the  account 
is  evident  from  the  following  passage  (Acts  vii  40),  where 
Stephen,  speaking  of  Moses,  says,  "This  is  he  ...  whom 
our  fathers  would  not  obey,  but  thrust  him  from  them,  and 
in  their  hearts  turned  back  again  into  Egypt,  saying  unto 
Aaron,  Make  us  gods  to  go  before  us ;  for  as  for  this  Moses, 
which  brought  us  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  we  wot  not 
what  is  become  of  him.  And  they  made  a  calf  in  those 
days,  and  offered  sacrifice  unto  the  idol,  and  rejoiced  in 
the  works  of  their  own  hands.  Then  God  turned,  and 

*  He  showed  considerable  skill,  if  -Dr  Beke  was  right,  in  his  applica- 
tion of  such  knowledge  (combined  with  special  knowledge  acquired 
during  his  stay  in  Midian)  so  that  his  people  should  cross  a  part  of  the 
Gulf  of  Suez  during  an  exceptionally  low  tide.  For  though  the 
Egyptians  may  have  been  acquainted  with  the  general  tidal  motion  in 
the  Red  Sea,  it  may  well  be  believed  that  the  army  of  Pharaoh  would 
be  less  familiar  than  Moses  with  local  peculiarities  affecting  (in  his  time) 
the  movements  of  that  sea. 


Saturn  and  the  Sabbath  of  the  Jews.      299 

gave  them  up  to  worship  the  host  of  heaven;  as  it  is 
written  in  the  book  of  the  prophets  ....  Ye  took  up  the 
tabernacle  of  Moloch,  and  the  star  of  your  god  Eemphan, 
figures  which  ye  made  to  worship  them."  * 

Now  I  might  pass  from  what  has  here  been  shewn,  to 
the  direct  inference  that  the  Sabbath  corresponded  with 
the  day  which  Oriental  Sabaisin  consecrated  to  the  planet 
Saturn ;  because  we  have  the  clearest  possible  evidence 
that  all  nations  which  adopted  the  week  as  a  measure  of 
time  named  the  seven  days  after  the  same  planets. 
But  I  prefer,  at  some  risk  of  appearing  to  weaken 

*  This  passage,  and  the  passage  from  Amos,  to  which  the  proto- 
martyr  refers,  are  curious  in  connection  with  the  special  subject  of  this 
paper,  as  indicated  by  its  title.  For  where  Stephen  says  Remphan, 
Amos  says  Chiun.  Now  it  is  maintained  by  Grotius  that  Remphan  is 
the  same  as  Rimmon,  whom  Naaman  worshipped,  and  Rimmon  or 
Remmon  signifies  "elevated"  (lit.  a  pomegranate),  and  is  understood 
by  Grotius  to  refer  to  Saturn,  the  highest  of  the  planets.  (The  student 
of  astronomy  will  remember  Galileo's  anagram  on  the  words 
"  Altissimum  planetam  tergeminum  observavi")  Now  Chiun,  which 
denotes  a  "pedestal,"  is  considered  to  be  equivalent  in  this  place  to 
Chevan,  or  Kevan,  the  Saturn  of  the  Arabians.  (Parkhurst  men- 
tions that  the  Peruvians  worshipped  Choun.  Moloch,  of  course, 
signifies  king.  Because  children  were  sacrificed  to  Moloch,  Bonfre"re 
considers  this  god  to  be  the  same  as  Saturn,  described  as  devouring  his 
own  children.  If  so,  the  words  "tabernacle  of  Moloch  and  the  star 
of  Remphan  "  relate  to  the  same  special  form  of  Sabaism — that,  namely, 
which  assigned  to  Saturn  the  chief  place  among  the  star-gods.  I  must 
remark,  however,  that  this  point  is  by  no  means  essential  for  the  main 
argument  of  this  paper,  which  is  in  reality  based  on  the  unquestioned 
fact  that  amongst  all  the  nations  which  used  the  week  as  a  division  of 
time,  the  seventh  day  was  associated  with  the  planet  Saturn.  It  is 
necessary  to  call  attention  to  this  point,  because  not  unfrequently  it 
happens  that  some  subsidiary  matter,  such  as  that  touched  on  in  this 
note,  is  dealt  with  as  though  the  whole  question  at  issue  turned 
upon  it. 


3OO  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

the  argument  by  introducing  matters  less  certain,  to 
consider  the  evidence  we  have  as  to  the  position  of  the 
god  corresponding  to  the  Latin  Saturn  in  the  Assyrian 
mythology. 

Many  years  since,  Colonel  (then  Major)  Eawlinson,  in  a 
paper  read  before  the  Eoyal  Asiatic  Society,  referring  to 
an  inscription  beginning,  "  This  the  Palace  of  Sardanapalus, 
the  humble  worshipper  of  Assarach,"  made  the  following 
remarks : — 

"There  can  be  no  doubt,"  he  said,  (I  quote  from  a  report  not  pro- 
fessing to  be  verbatim)  "  that  this  Assarach  was  the  Nisroch 
mentioned  in  Scripture,  in  whose  temple  Sennacherib  was  slain.  He 
was  most  probably  the  deified  father  of  the  tribes,  the  Assur 
of  the  Bible.  This  Assarach  was  styled  in  all  the  inscriptions  as 
the  king,  the  father,  and  the  ruler  of  the  gods,  thug  answering 
to  the  Greek  god,  Chronos,  or  Saturn,  in  Assyrio- Hellenic  my- 
thology." 

Again  Layard,  speaking  of  Assyrian  mythology,  says — 

"  All  we  can  now  venture  to  infer  is  that  the  Assyrians  worshipped 
one  supreme  God  as  the  great  national  deity,  under  whose 
immediate  and  special  protection  they  lived,  and  their  empire 
existed.  The  name  of  this  god  appears  to  have  been  Asshur, 
as  nearly  as  can  be  determined  at  present  from  the  inscriptions. 
It  was  identified  with  that  of  the  empire  itself,  always  called  '  the 
country  of  Asshur.'  With  Asshur,  but  apparently  far  inferior  to 
him  in  the  celestial  hierarchy,  although  called  the  great  gods,  were 
associated  twelve  other  deities  .  .  These  twelve  gods  may  have 
presided  over  the  twelve  months  of  the  year." — (Nineveh  and  Babylon, 
p.  637.) 

In  a  note,  Layard  refers  to  doubts  expressed  by  Colonel 
Eawlinson  respecting  the  identity  of  Asshur  and  Nisroch, 
presumably  removed  by  Eawlinson's  later  reading  of  the 


Saturn  and  the  Sabbath  of  the  Jews.      301 

inscription  referred  to  above.  He  remarks  that  this 
supreme  god  was  represented  sometimes  under  a  triune 
form  ;  and  '  generally,  if  not  always,  typified  by  a  winged 
figure  in  a  circle.'  Plate  XIV.  of  my  treatise  on  Saturn 
shews  how  these  two  descriptions  are  reconcilable  ;  for 
there  are  shewn  in  it  two  figures  of  Msroch,  both  winged 
and  within  a  ring,  but  one  only  triune.* 

Amongst  the  twelve  great  gods  were  included  six 
corresponding"  to  the  remaining  planets,  though  doubts 
exist  as  to  the  gods  associated  with  the  different 
celestial  bodies.  It  seems  probable  that  Sham  ash  cor- 
responded with  the  Sun ;  Ishtar  (Astarte  or  Ashtar)  with 
the  Moon  ;  Bel  with  Jupiter  -f- ;  Merodach  with  Mars ; 
Mylitta  with  Venus  ;  and  Nebo  with  Mercury.  But  the 


*  I  do  not  here  dwell  on  the  curious  coincidence — if,  indeed,  Chaldean 
astronomers  had  not  discovered  the  ring  of  Saturn — that  they  shewed 
the  god  corresponding  within  a  ring,  and  triple.  Galileo's  first  view 
of  Saturn,  with  feeble  telescopic  power,  shewed  the  planet  as  triple 
(tergeminus) ;  and  very  moderate  optical  knowledge,  such  indeed  as  we 
may  fairly  infer  from  the  presence  of  optical  instruments  among  Assyrian 
remains,  might  have  led  to  the  discovery  of  Saturn's  ring  and  Jupiter's 
Moons.  (Bel,  the  Assyrian  Jupiter,  was  represented  sometimes  with 
four  star-tipped  wings.)  But  it  is  possible  that  these  are  mere  coinci- 
dences. Saturn  would  naturally  come  to  be  regarded  as  the  God  of 
Time,  on  account  of  his  slow  motion  round  the  ecliptic  ;  and  thus  the 
ring  (a  natural  emblem  of  time)  might  be  expected  to  appear  in  figures 
of  the  god  corresponding  to  this  planet.  It  is  curious,  however,  that 
the  ring  is  flat,  and  proportioned  like  Saturn's. 

t  Layard  associates  Bel,  "  the  father  of  the  great  gods,"  with  Saturn, 
and  Mylitta  the  consort  of  Bel  with  Venus,  but  without  giving  any 
reasons,  and  probably  merely  as  a  guess.  He  elsewhere  remarks,  how- 
ever, that  from  Baal  came  the  Belus  of  the  Greeks,  who  was  confounded 
with  their  own  Zeus  or  Jupiter,  and  apart  from  the  clear  evidence 
associating  Nisroch  with  Saturn,  the  evidence  connecting  Bel  with 


302  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

question  would  only  be  of  importance  in  its  bearing  on  my 
present  subject,  if  we  knew  the  Assyrian  time-measure-- 
ment,  and  especially  their  arrangement  of  the  days  of  the 
week.  Since  we  have  to  pass  to  other  sources  of  informa- 
tion on  this  point,  the  only  really  important  fact  in  the 
Assyrian  mythology,  for  our  purpose,  is  the  nearly  certain 
one  that  their  supreme  god  Asshur  or  Nisroch  corresponded 
to  the  '  highest '  or  outermost  planet  Saturn.  He  was  also 
the  Time  God,  thus  corresponding  to  Chronos.  But  it  is 
necessary  to  notice  here  that  mythological  relations  must 
to  some  degree  be  separated  from  astrological  considera- 
tions, in  dealing  with  the  connection  between  various 
Assyrio-Chaldsean  deities  and  the  planets.  For  instance, 
it  is  important  in  mythology  to  observe  that  the  Greek 
god  Chronos  and  the  Latin  god  Saturn  are  unlike  in  many 
of  their  attributes,  yet  the  association  between  the  planet 
Saturn  and  the  Assyrian  deity  Nisroch  is  not  on  that 
account  brought  into  question,  although  we  can  only 
connect  Nisroch  with  Saturn  by  means  of  the  common 
relation  of  both  to  Chronos. 

Many  circumstances  point  to  the  Chaldaean  origin  of 
Egyptian  astronomy.  The  Egyptian  zodiac  corresponded 
with  the  Dodecatemoria  of  the  Chaldseans,  and  though 
some  of  the  Chaldaean  constellations  were  modified  in 
Egyptian  temples,  yet  sufficient  general  resemblance  exists 
between  the  Egyptian  arrangement  and  that  which  other 

Jupiter  is  tolerably  satisfactory.  The  point  is  not  important,  however, 
in  relation  to  the  subject  of  this  paper.  On  etymological  grounds,  Yav, 
the  fifth  of  the  great  gods,  may  perhaps  be  associated  with  Zeus, 
identical  with  the  Sanscrit  Dyaus,  and  the  Latin  root  "  Jov." 


Saturn  and  the  Sabbath  of  the  Jews.      303 

nations  derived  from  the  Chaldseans,  to  shew  the  real 
origin  of  the  figures  which  adorn  Egyptian  zodiac  temples.* 
The  argument  derived  from  astrological  fancies  is  even 
stronger,  for  the  whole  system  of  astrological  divination  is 
so  artificial  and  peculiar  that  it  must  of  necessity  be 
ascribed  to  one  nation.  To  find  the  system  prevailing 

*  In  an  essay  on  '  The  Shield  of  Achilles '  ( '  Light  Science  for 
Leisure  Hours, '  first  series),  I  called  attention,  seven  years  ago,  to  the 
probability  that  the  description  of  the  Shield,  a  manifest  interpolation, 
related  originally  to  a  zodiac  temple,  erected  by  star- worshippers  long 
before  Homer's  time.  Some  of  the  Egyptian  zodiac  temples  exist  to 
his  day,  though  probably  they  belong  to  a  much  later  date,  and  were 
only  copies  (more  or  less  perfect)  of  the  ancient  Chaldsean  temples. 
That  Homer,  if  he  had  visited  such  a  temple,  and  had  composed  a  poem 
descriptive  of  its  sculptured  dome,  would  have  'worked  in'  that 
description  if  he  saw  the  opportunity  when  singing  the  Iliad,  all 
Homeric  students  will  be  ready  to  admit.  Like  every  improvisatore, 
the  glorious  old  minstrel  knew  the  advantage  of  the  rest  afforded  by 
an  occasional  change  from  invention  to  recitation.  In  so  using  it,  he 
appears  to  have  pruned  the  description  considerably ;  for  in  the 
'  Shield  of  Hercules  '  (manifestly  taken  from  the  same  Homeric  poem, 
though  sometimes  attributed  to  Hesiod)  we  find,  along  with  much 
almost  identical  matter,  several  passages  which  are  omitted  from  the 
Achillean  description.  Very  curious  evidence  of  the  nature  of  the 
original  poem  is  found  in  one  of  these  passages.  In  a  zodiac.±emple,  the 
constellation  of  the  Dragon  (whatever  the  age  of  the  temple)  would 
occupy  the  boss  or  centre  of  the  dome,  for  the  north  pole  of  the  zodiac 
falls  in  the  middle  of  that  constellation.  Now  in  the  '  Shield  of 
Hercules ' — 

'  The  scaly  horror  of  a  dragon  coil'd 
Full  in  the  central  field,  unspeakable 
With  eyes  oblique  retorted,  that  aslant 
Shot  gleaming  flame. 

(The  very  attitude,  be  it  noted,  of  the  Dragon  of  the  Star  sphere.) 
There  is  much  more  evidence  of  this  kind  to  which,  for  want  of  space, 
I  cannot  here  refer. 


304  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

among  any  people  is  of  itself  a  sufficient  proof  that  they 
were  taught  by  that  nation.  Nor  can  any  question  arise 
as  to  the  nation  which  invented  the  system.  The 
Egyptians  themselves  admitted  the  superiority  of  the 
Chaldaean  astrologers,  and  the  common  consent  of  all  the 
Oriental  nations  accorded  with  this  view.  We  know  that 
in  Rome,  although  Armenians,  Egyptians,  and  Jews  were 
consulted  as  astronomers,  Chaldseans  were  held  to  "be  the 
most  proficient.  'Chaldseis  sed  major  erit  fiducia,'  says 
Juvenal,  of  the  Eoman  ladies,  who  consulted  fortune- 
tellers :  '  quicquid  Dixerit  astrologus,  credent  a  fonte 
relatis  Ammonis,' — whatever  the  Chalda?an  astrologers 
may  say,  they  trust  as  though  it  came  from  Jupiter 
Ammon.  Another  argument  in  favour  of  the  Chaldsean 
origin  of  astronomy  and  astrology  is  derived  from  the  fact 
that  the  systems  of  astronomy  taught  in  Egypt,  Babylon, 
Persepolis,  and  elsewhere,  do  not  correspond  with  the 
latitude  of  these  places ;  but  this  argument  (which  I  have 
considered  at  some  length  in  Appendix  A.  to  my  treatise 
on  Saturn)  need  not  detain  us  here.  It  is  sufficient  to 
observe  that  in  Egypt  the  astrological  system  was  early 
received  and  taught : — 

'Egypt,'  says  a  modern  writer,  'a  country  noted  for  the  love- 
liness of  its  nights,  might  well  be  the  supporter  of  such  a 
system  .  .  To  each  planet  was  attributed  a  mystic  influence,  and 
to  every  heavenly  body  a  supernatural  agency,  and  all  the  stars  that 
gem  the  sky  were  supposed  to  exert  an  influence,  over  the  birth,  and 
life,  and  destiny  of  man ;  hence  arose  the  casting  of  nativities, 
prayers,  incantations,  and  sacrifices, — of  which  we  have  traces  even 
to  the  present  day  in  those  professors  of  astrology  and  divination,  the 


Saturn  and  the  Sabbath  of  the  Jews.      305 

gipsies,  whose  very  name  links  them  with  the  ancient  country  of 
such  arts."* 

One  of  the  cardinal  principles  of  astrology  was  this  : 
that  every  hour  and  every  day  is  ruled  by  its  proper 
planet.  Now,  in  the  ancient  Egyptian  astronomy  there 
were  seven  planets ;  two,  the  sun,  and  moon,  circling 
round  the  earth,  the  rest  circling  round  the  sun.  The 
period  of  circulation  was  apparently  taken  as  the  measure 
of  each  planet's  dignity,  probably  because  it  was  judged 
that  the  distance  corresponded  to  the  period.  We  know 
that  some  harmonious  relation  between  the  distances  and 
periods  was  supposed  to  exist.  When  Kepler  discovered 
the  actual  law,  he  conceived  that  he  had  in  reality  found 
out  the  mystery  of  Egyptian  astronomy,  or,  as  he  expressed 
it,  that  he  had  "  stolen  the  golden  vases  of  the  Egyptians. " 
Whether  they  had  clear  ideas  as  to  the  nature  of  this 
relation  or  not,  it  is  certain  that  they  arranged  the  planets 
in  order  (beginning  with  the  planet  of  longest  period)  as 
follows : — 

1.  Saturn.  5.  Venus. 

2.  Jupiter.  6.  Mercury. 

3.  Mars.  7.  The  Moon. 
•  4.  The  Sun. 

The  hours  were  devoted  in  continuous  succession  to 
these  bodies ;  and  as  there  were  twenty-four  hours  in  each 
Chaldeean  or  Egyptian  day,  it  follows  that  with  whatever 

*  This  may  be  questioned.  It  is  said,  however,  that  when  the 
gipsies  first  made  their  appearance  in  Western  Europe,  about  the  year 
1415,  their  leader  called  himself  Duke  of  Lower  Egypt. 


306  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

planet  the  day  began  the  cycle  of  seven  planets  (beginning 
with  that  one)  was  repeated  three  times,  making  twenty- 
one  hours,  and  then  the  first  three  planets  of  the  cycle 
completed  the  twenty-four  hours,  so  that  the  fourth 
planet  of  the  cycle  (so  begun)  ruled  the  first  hour  of  the 
next  day.  Suppose,  for  instance,  the  first  hour  of  any 
day  was  ruled  by  the  Sun — the  cycle  for  the  day  would 
therefore  be  the  Sun,  Venus,  Mercury,  the  Moon,  Saturn, 
Jupiter,  and  Mars,  which,  repeated  three  times,  would 
give  twenty-one  hours ;  the  twenty-second,  twenty-third 
and  twenty-fourth  hours  would  be  ruled  respectively  by 
the  Sun,  Venus,  and  Mercury,  and  the  first  hour  of  the 
next  day  would  be  ruled  by  the  Moon.  Proceeding  in 
the  same  way  through  this  second  day,  we  find  that  the 
first  hour  of  the  third  day  would  be  ruled  by  Mars.  The 
first  hour  of  the  fourth  day  would  be  ruled  by  Mercury ; 
the  first  hour  of  the  fifth  day  by  Jupiter  ;  of  the  sixth  by 
Venus  ;  and  of  the  seventh  by  Saturn.  The  seven  days 
in  order,  being  assigned  to  the  planet  ruling  their  first 
hour,  would  therefore  be — 

1.  The  Sun's  day  (Sunday). 

2.  The  Moon's  day  (Monday,  Lundi). 

3.  Mars'  day  (Tuesday,  Mardi). 

4.  Mercury's  day  (Wednesday,  Mercredi). 

5.  Jupiter's  day  (Thursday,  Jeudi). 

6.  Venus's  day  (Friday,  Veneris  dies,  Vendredi). 

7.  Saturn's  day  (Saturday  ;  Ital.  il  Sabbato). 

Dion  Cassius,  who  wrote  in  the  3rd  century  of  our  era, 


Saturn  and  the  Sabbath  of  the  Jews.      307 

gives  this  explanation  of  the  nature  of  the  Egyptian  week 
and  of  the  method  in  which  the  arrangement  was  derived 
from  their  system  of  astronomy.  It  is  a  noteworthy  point 
that  neither  the  Greeks  nor  Romans  in  his  time  used  the 
week,  which  was  a  period  of  strictly  Oriental  origin. 
The  Eomans  only  adopted  the  week  in  the  time  of 
Theodosius,  towards  the  close  of  the  fourth  century,  and 
the  Greeks  divided  the  month  into  periods  of  ten  days  ;  so 
that,  for  the  origin  of  the  arrangement  connecting  the  days 
of  the  week  with  the  planets,  we  must  look  to  the  source 
indicated  by  Dion  Cassius.  It  is  a  curious  illustration  of 
the  way  in  which  traditions  are  handed  down,  not  only 
from  generation  to  generation,  but  from  nation  to  nation, 
that  the  Latin  and  western  nations  receiving  the  week 
along  with  the  doctrines  of  Christianity,  should  neverthe- 
less have  adopted  the  nomenclature  in  use  among 
astrologers.  It  is  impossible  to  "say  how  widely  the 
superstitions  of  astrology  had  spread,  or  how  deeply  they 
had  penetrated,  for  the  practices  of  astrologers  were 
carried  on  in  secret,  wherever  Sabaism  was  rejected  as  a 
form  of  religion ;  but  that  in  some  mysterious  way 
these  superstitions  spread  among  nations  professing 
faith  in  one  God,  and  that  even  to  this  day  they  are 
secretly  accepted  in  Mahometan  and  even  Christian  com- 
munities, cannot  be  disputed.  How  much  more  must 
such  superstitions  have  affected  the  Jews,  led  out  by  Moses 
from  the  very  temple  of  astrology  ?  Knowing  what  we  do 
of  the  influence  of  such  superstitions  in  our  own  time,  can 
we  wonder  if  three  thousand  years  ago  Moses  found  it 
14 


308  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

difficult  to  dispossess  his  followers  of  their  belief  in  "  the 
host  of  heaven,"  or  if,  a  few  generations  later,  even  the 
reputed  prophetess  Deborah  should  have  been  found 
proclaiming  that  "  the  stars  in  their  courses  "  had  fought 
against  the  enemies  of  Israel.* 

*  We  are  apt  to  overlook  the  Pagan  origin  of  many  ideas  referred  to 
in  the  Bible,  as  well  as  of  many  ceremonies  which  Moses  at  least  per- 
mitted, if  he  did  not  enjoin.  The  description  of  the  Ark  of  the  Cove- 
nant, of  the  method  of  sacrifices,  of  the  priestly  vestments,  &c. ,  indicate 
in  the  clearest  manner  an  Egyptian  or  Assyrian  origin.  The  cherubim, 
for  instance — figures  which  united,  as  Calmet  has  shewn,  the  body  of 
the  lion  or  ox  with  the  wings  of  an  eagle — are  common  in  Assyrian 
scriptures.  The  oracle  of  the  temple  differed  only  from  some  of  the 
chambers  of  Nimrod  and  Korsabad,  in  the  substitution  of  '  palm  trees ' 
for  the  sacred  tree  of  Assyrian  scriptures,  and  open  flowers  for  the 
Assyrian  tulip-shaped  ornament.  Layard  (' Nineveh  and  Babylon,' p. 
643)  states  further  that  'in  the  Assyrian  halls,  the  winged  human- 
headed  bulls  were  on  the  side  of  the  wall,  and  their  wings,  like  those  of 
the  cherubim,  'touched  one  another  in  the  midst  of  the  house.' 
The  dimensions  of  these  figures  were  in  some  cases  nearly  the  same — 
namely,  fifteen  feet  square.  The  doors  were  also  carved  with  cherubim 
and  palm  trees,  and  open  flowers,  and  thus,  with  the  other  parts  of  the 
building,  corresponded  with  those  of  the  Assyrian  palaces.  On  the 
walls  at  Nineveh,  the  only  addition  appears  to  have  been,  the  intro- 
duction of  the  human  form  and  the  image  of  the  king,  which  were  an 
abomination  to  the  Jews.  The  pomegranates  and  lilies  of  Solomon's 
temple  must  have  been  nearly  identical  with  the  usual  'Assyrian 
ornament,  in  which — and  particularly  at  Khorsabad — the  pomegranate 
frequently  takes  the  place  of  the  tulip  and  the  cone.'  After  quoting 
the  description  given  by  Josephus  of  the  interior  of  one  of  Solomon's 
houses,  which  even  more  closely  corresponds  with  and  illustrates  the 
chambers  in  the  palace  of  Nineveh,  Layard  makes  the  following 
remark  :  '  To  complete  the  analogy  between  the  two  edifices,  it  would 
appear  that  Solomon  was  seven  years  building  the  temple,  and  Sen- 
nacherib about  the  same  time  building  his  great  palace  at  Kouyunjik.' 
The  introduction  into  the  Ark  of  figures  so  remarkable  as  the  cherubim 
can  hardly  be  otherwise  explained  than  by  assuming  that  these  figures 
corresponded  with  some  objects  which  the  Jews  during  their  stay 


Saturn  and  the  Sabbath  of  the  Jews.     309 

That  the  Egyptians  dedicated  the  seventh  day  of  the 
week  to  the  outermost  or  highest  planet,  Saturn,  is  certain ; 
and  it  is  presumable  that  this  day  was  a  day  of  rest  in 
Egypt.  It  is  not  known,  however,  whether  this  was 
ordained  in  honour  of  the  chief  planet — that  is  their 
supreme  deity, — or  because  it  was  held  unlucky  to  work  on 
that  day.  It  by  no  means  follows  from  the  fact  that 
Nisroch,  or  his  Egyptian  representative,  was  the  chief 
deity,  that  he  was  therefore  regarded  as  a  beneficent  ruler. 
Rather  what  we  know  of  Oriental  superstitions  would 
lead  us  to  infer  that  the  chief  deity  in  a  system  of  several 
gods  was  one  to  be  propitiated.  And  indeed,  the  little  we 
know  of  Egyptian  mythology  suggests  that  the  beneficent 
gods  were  those  corresponding  to  the  sun  and  moon, — 
later  represented  by  Osiris  and  Isis  (deities,  however, 
which  had  other  interpretations),  Saturn,  though  superior 

in  Egypt  had  learned  to  associate  with  religious  ceremonies.  That 
the  Egyptians  used  such  figures,  placing  them  at  the  entrance  of  their 
temples,  is  certain.  Neither  can  it  be  doubted  that  the  setting  of 
dishes,  spoons,  bowls,  shewbread,  &c.,  on  the  table  within  the  Ark, 
was  derived  from  Egyptian  ceremonials,  though  direct  evidence  on 
these  points  is  not  (so  far  as  I  know)  available.  We  know,  however, 
that  meats  of  all  kinds  were  set  before  Baal  (see  'Apocrypha,'  Bel 
and  the  Dragon).  The  remarkable  breast-plate  worn  by  the  Jewish 
high  priest  was  derived  directly  from  the  Egyptians.  In  the  often- 
repeated  picture  of  judgment  the  deceased  Egyptian  is  seen  conducted 
by  the  god  Horus,  while  '  Anubis  places  on  one  of  the  balances  a  vase 
supposed  to  contain  his  good  actions,  and  in  the  other  is  the  emblem  of 
truth,  a  representation  of  Thmei,  the  goddess  of  Truth,  which  was  also 
worn  on  the  judicial  breast-plate.'  Wilkinson,  in  his  '  Manners  and 
Customs  of  the  Ancient  Egyptians,'  shows  that  the  Hebrew  Thummim 
is  a  plural  form  of  the  word  Thmei.  The  symbolism  of  the  breast-plate 
is  referred  to  in  the  '  Apocrypha, '  Book  of  Wisdom,  Ixviii.  24. 


3  io  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

to  the  sun  and  moon,  not  only  in  the  sense  in  which 
modern  astronomers  use  the  term  superior,  but  also  in  the 
power  attributed  to  him,  was  probably  a  maleficent  if  not 
a  malignant  deity.  We  may  infer  this  from  the  qualities 
attributed  to  him  by  astrologers — 

*  If  Saturn  be  predominant  in  any  man's  nativity,  and  cause  melan- 
choly in  his  temperature,'  says  Burton,  in  his  'Anatomy  of  Melan- 
choly,' 'then  he  shall  be  very  austere,  sullen,  churlish,  black  of 
colour,  profound  in  his  cogitations,  full  of  cares,  miseries,  and 
discontents,  sad  and  fearful,  always  silent  and  solitary.' 

"VVe  may  not  unreasonably  conclude,  therefore,  that  either 
rest  was  enjoined  on  Saturn's  day  as  a  religious  observance 
to  propitiate  this  powerful  but  gloomy  god,  or  else  because 
bad  fortune  was  expected  to  attend  any  enterprise  begun 
on  the  day  over  which  Saturn  bore  sway.  The  evil 
influence,  as  well  as  the  great  power  attributed  to  Saturn, 
are  indicated  in  the  well-known  lines  of  Chaucer : — 

'    .    .     .     Quod  Saturne, 
My  core,  that  hath  so  wide  for  to  turne, 
Hath  more  power  than  wot  any  man  ; 

***** 

'  I  do  vengeaunce  and  pleine  correction 

While  I  dwell  in  the  signe  of  the  leon ; 

***** 

'  Min  ben  also  the  maladies  colde 
The  darke  tresons,  and  the  castes  oldo 
My  loking  is  the  fader  of  pestilence.' 

It  is,  however,  possible  that  the  idea  of  rest  on  the  day 
dedicated  to  Saturn  may  have  been  suggested  to  Egyptian 
astrologers  and  priests  by  the  slow  motion  of  the  planet  in 


Saturn  and  the  Sabbath  of  the  Jews.      3 1 1 

his  orbit,  whereby  the  circuit  of  the  ecliptic  is  only  com- 
pleted in  about  twenty-nine  years. 

However  this  may  be,  we  know  certainly  that  on  the 
Sabbath  of  the  Jews  rest  was  enjoined  for  a  different 
reason.  Moses  adopted  the  Egyptian  week  and  allowed 
the  practice  of  a  weekly  day  of  rest  to  continue.  But  in 
order  that  the  people  whom  he  led  and  instructed  might 
not  fall  into  the  worship  of  the  host  of  heaven,  he 
associated  the  observance  of  the  seventh  day  with  the 
worship  of  that  one  God  in  whom  he  enjoined  them  to 
believe,  the  God  of  their  forefathers,  Abraham,  Isaac,  and 
Jacob.  So  far  as  appears  from  the  Bible  narrative,  there 
is  no  scriptural  objection  to  this  view.  On  the  contrary, 
strong  scriptural  reasons  exist  for  accepting  it.  If  the 
account  of  the  creation  given  in  the  first  chapter  of 
Genesis  could  be  accepted  as  literally  exact,  it  neverthe- 
less would  not  follow  that  the  seventh  day  of  rest  was 
enjoined  before  the  time  of  exodus.  And  we  have  seen 
that  the  Bible  account  itself  assigns  the  departure  from 
Egypt  as  a  reason  for  the  observance,  so  that  whatever 
view  we  form  respecting  the  real  origin  of  the  seventh 
day  of  rest,  we  have  no  choice  as  to  the  time  we  must 
assign  for  the  commencement  of  its  observance  by  the 
Jews,  unless  Deuteronomy  v.  be  rejected  as  not  even 
historically  trustworthy. 

Nothing,  therefore,  that  I  have  shewn  in  this  paper 
need  be  regarded  as  necessarily  opposed  to  the  faith  of 
those  who  honestly  believe  in  the  literal  exactness  of  the 
reason  assigned  in  Exodus  xxxi.  17,  for  the  observance  of 


3 1 2  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

the  Sabbath  'of  the  Jews.  Such  persons  may  accept 
the  week  as  of  Pagan  origin,  and  the  original  observance  of 
Saturn's  day  as  of  astrological  significance,  while  believing 
in  the  reason  given  by  Moses  for  the  adoption  of  the  practice 
by  his  followers,  that '  in  six  days  the  Lord  made  heaven  and 
earth,  and  on  the  seventh  day  he  rested  and  was  refreshed.' 
(The  idea  of  rest,  accepted  literally,  accords  neither  better 
nor  worse  with  the  conception  of  an  Almighty  Creator, 
than  the  idea  of  work.)  But  it  seems  to  me  that  those 
who  thus  regard  the  Jewish  Sabbath  as  a  divinely  in- 
stituted compromise  between  the  worship  of  the  seven 
planets  as  gods,  and  the  worship  of  one  only  God  the 
Creator  of  all  things,  may  yet  find  in  what  I  have  here 
shewn  a  new  reason  for  Christianising  our  seventh  day  of 
rest,  even  if  we  must  still  continue  to  miscall  it  the 
Sabbath.  Since  it  was  permissible  for  Moses  to  adopt 
a  Pagan  practice  (to  sanction,  if  not  to  sanctify,  a  super- 
stition), it  may  well  be  believed  that  a  greater  than  Moses 
was  entitled  to  change  the  mode  of  observance  of  the 
seventh  day  of  rest.  We  know  that  in  Christ's  time  the 
Sabbath  (of  its  very  nature  a  convenient  ceremonial 
substitute  for  true  religion)  had  become  a  hideous  tyranny  ; 
nay,  that  many,  wanting  real  goodness,  were  eager  to 
prove  their  virtue  by  inflicting  the  Sabbath  on  those  who 
most  needed  'to  rest  and  be  refreshed'  on  that  day. 
Whether  in  the  obedience  to  the  teaching  of  Christ,  who 
(we  learn)  rebuked  those  hypocrites,  all  this  has  been 
changed  in  our  time,  is  a  point  which  may  be  left  to  the 
reflection  of  the  reader. 


THOUGHTS  ON  ASTROLOGY. 

WE  are  apt  to  speak  of  astrology  as  though  it  were  an  alto- 
gether contemptible  superstition,  and  to  contemplate  with 
pity  those  who  believed  in  it  in  old  times.  And  yet,  if  we 
consider  the  matter  aright,  we  must  concede,  I  think,  that 
of  all  the  errors  into  which  men  have  fallen  in  their  desire 
to  penetrate  into  futurity,  astrology  is  the  most  respectable, 
one  may  even  say  the  most  reasonable.  Indeed,  all  other 
methods  of  divination  of  which  I  have  ever  heard,  are  not 
worthy  to  be  mentioned  in  company  with  astrology,  which, 
delusion  though  it  was,  had  yet  a  foundation  in  thoughts 
well  worthy  of  consideration.  The  heavenly  bodies  do  rule 
the  fates  of  men  and  nations  in  the  most  unmistakable 
manner,  seeing  that  without  the  controlling  and  beneficent 
influences  of  the  chief  among  those  orbs — the  sun — every 
living  creature  on  the  earth  must  perish.  The  ancients 
perceived  that  the  moon  has  so  potent  an  influence  on  our 
world  that  the  waters  of  the  ocean  rise  and  fall  in  unison 
with  her  apparent  circling  motion  around  the  earth.  Seeing 
that  two  among  the  orbs  which  move  upon  the  unchanging 
dome  of  the  star-sphere  are  thus  potent  in  terrestrial 
influences,  was  it  not  natural  that  the  other  moving  bodies 
known  to  the  ancients  should  be  thought  to  possess  also 


3 1 4  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

their  special  powers  ?  The  moon,  seemingly  less  important 
than  the  sun,  not  merely  by  reason  of  her  less  degree  of 
splendour,  but  also  because  she  performs  her  circuit  of  the 
star  sphere  in  a  shorter  interval  of  time,  was  seen  to  possess 
a  powerful  influence,  but  still  an  influence  far  less  import- 
ant than  that  exerted  by  the  sun,  or  rather  than  the  many 
influences  manifestly  emanating  from  him.  But  other 
bodies  travelled  in  yet  wider  circuits  if  their  distances  could 
be  inferred  from  their  periods  of  revolution.  Was  it  not 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  influences  exerted  by  those 
slowly  moving  bodies  might  be  even  more  potent  than 
those  of  the  sun  himself?  Mars  circling  round  the  star- 
sphere  in  a  period  nearly  twice  as  great  as  the  sun's,  Jupiter 
in  twelve  years,  and  Saturn  in  twenty-nine,  might  well  be 
thought  to  be  rulers  of  superior  dignity  to  the  sun,  though 
less  glorious  in  appearance ;  and  since  no  obvious  direct 
effects  are  produced  by  them  as  they  change  in  position,  it 
was  natural  to  attribute  to  them  influences  more  subtle, 
but  not  the  less  potent. 

Thus  was  conceived  the  thought  that  the  fortunes  of 
every  man  born  into  the  world  depend  on  the  position  of 
the  various  planets  at  the  moment  of  his  birth.  And  if 
there  was  something  artificial  in  the  rules  by  •which  various 
influences  were  assigned  to  particular  planets,  or  to 
particular  aspects  of  the  planets,  it  must  be  remembered 
that  the  system  of  astrology  was  formed  gradually  and 
perhaps  tentatively.  Some  influences  may  have  been 
inferred  from  observed  events,  the  fate  of  this  or  that  king 
or  chief  guiding  astrologers  in  assigning  particular  in- 


Thoughts  on  Astrology.  3 1 5 

fluences  to  such  planetary  aspects  as  were  presented  at  the 
time  of  his  nativity;.  Others  may  have  been  invented,  and 
afterwards  have  found  general  acceptance  because  con- 
firmed by  some  curious  coincidences.  In  the  long  run, 
indeed,  any  series  of  experimental  predictions  must  have 
led  to  some  very  surprising  fulfilments,  that  is,  to  fulfil- 
ments which  would  have  been  exceedingly  surprising  if 
the  corresponding  predictions  had  been  the  only  ones  made 
by  astrologers.  Such  instances,  carefully  collected,  may 
at  first  have  been  used  solely  to  improve  the  system  of 
prediction.  The  astrologer  may  have  been  careful  to 
separate  the  fulfilled  from  the  unfulfilled  predictions,  and 
thus  to  establish  a  safe  rule.  For  it  must  be  remembered, 
that  admitting  the  cardinal  principle  of  astrology,  the 
astrologer  had .  every  reason  to  believe  that  he  could 
experimentally  determine  a  true  method  of  prediction.  If 
the  planets  really  rule  the  fate  of  each  man,  then  we  have 
only  to  calculate  their  position  at  the  known  time  of  any 
man's  birth,  and  to  consider  his  fortunes,  to  have  facts 
whence  to  infer  the  manner  in  which  their  influence  is 
exerted.  The  study  of  one  man's  life  would  of  course  be 
altogether  insufficient.  But  when  the  fortunes  of  many 
men  were  studied  in  this  way,  the  astrologer  (always 
supposing  his  first  supposition  right)  would  have  materials 
from  which  to  form  a  system  of  prediction. 

Go  a  step  further.  Select  a  body  of  the  ablest  men  in 
a  country,  and  let  them  carry  out  continuous  studies  of 
the  heavens,  carefully  calculate  nativities  for  every  person 
of  note,  or  even  for  every  soul  born  in  their  country,  and 


3 1 6  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

compare  the  events  of  each  person's  life  with  the  planetary 
relations  presented  at  his  birth.  It  is  manifest  that  a 
trustworthy  system  of  prediction  would,  in  the  long  run, 
be  deduced  by  them,  if  astrology  have  a  rea~l  basis  in  fact. 

I  do  not  say  that  astrologers  always  proceeded  in  this 
experimental  manner.  Doubtless  in  those  days,  as  now, 
men  of  science  were  variously  constituted,  some  being 
disposed  to  trust  chiefly  to  observation,  while  others  were 
ready  to  generalize,  and  yet  others  evolved  theories  from 
the  depths  of  their  moral  consciousness.  Indeed,  what  we 
know  of  the  development  of  astrology  in  later  times,  as 
well  as  the  way  in  which  other  modes  of  divination  have 
sprung  into  existence,  shows  that  the  natural  tendency  of 
astrologers  would  be  to  invent  systems  rather  than  to 
establish  them  by  careful  and  long-continued  observation. 
Within  a  very  few  years  of  the  discovery  of  the  spots  on 
the  sun,  a  tolerably  complete  system  of  divination  was 
founded  upon  the  appearance,  formation,  and  motions  of 
these  objects.  Certainly  this  system  was  not  based  on 
observation,  nor  will  anyone  suppose  that  the  rules  for 
'  reading  the  hand '  had  an  observational  origin,  or  that 
fortune-telling  by  means  of  cards  was  derived  from  a  care- 
ful comparison  of  the  result  of  shuffling,  cutting  and  deal- 
ing, with  the  future  fortunes  of  those  for  whose  enlighten- 
ment these  important  processes  were  performed. 

But  we  must  not  forget  that  astrology  was  originally  a 
science,  though  a  false  one.  Grant  the  truth  of  its  cardinal 
idea,  and  it  had  every  right  to  this  position.  No  office 
could  be  more  important  than  that  of  the  astrologer,  no 


Thoughts  on  Astrology.  317 

services  could  be  more  useful  than  those  he  was  capable 
of  rendering  according  to  his  own  belief  as  well  as  that  of 
those  who  employed  him.  It  is  only  necessary  to  mention 
the  history  of  astrology  to  perceive  the  estimation  in  which 
it  was  held  in  ancient  times. 

As  to  the  extreme  antiquity  of  astrology  it  is  perhaps 
needless  to  speak ;  indeed,  its  origin  is  so  remote  that  we 
have  only  imperfect  traditions  respecting  its  earliest 
developments.  Yet  it  may  be  worth  while  to  mention 
some  of  these  traditions,  seeing  that,  whether  true  or  not, 
they  shew  clearly  enough  the  great  antiquity  attributed 
to  astrology,  even  in  times  which  to  ourselves  appear 
remote.  Philo  asserts  that  Terah,  the  father  of  Abraham, 
was  skilled  in  all  that  relates  to  astrology ;  and,  according 
to  Josephus,  the  Chaldsean  Berosus  attributed  to  Abraham 
a  profound  knowledge  of  arithmetic,  astrology,  and  astro- 
nomy, in  which  sciences  he  instructed  the  Egyptians. 
Diodorus  Siculus  says  that  the  Heliadse,  or  children  of  the 
sun  (that  is,  men  from  the  east,)  excelled  all  other  men  in 
knowledge,  particularly  in  the  knowledge  of  the  stars. 
One  of  this  race,  named  Actis  (a  ray),  built  Heliopolis, 
and  named  it  after  his  father,  the  sun.  Thenceforward 
the  Egyptians  cultivated  astrology  with  so  much  assiduity 
as  to  be  considered  its  inventors.  On  the  other  hand 
Tatius  says  that  the  Egyptians  taught  the  Chaldaeans 
astrology.  The  people  of  Thebais,  according  to  Diodorus 
Siculus,  claimed  the  power  of  predicting  every  future  event 
with  the  utmost  certainty ;  they  also  asserted  that  they 
were  of  all  races  the  most  ancient. 


3 1 8  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

However,  we  have,  both  in  Egypt  and  in  Assyria 
records  far  more  satisfactory  than  these  conflicting  state- 
ments to  prove  the  great  antiquity  of  astrology,  and  the 
importance  attached  to  it  when  it  was  regarded  as  a 
science.  The  great  pyramid  in  Egypt  was  unquestionably 
an  astronomical,  that  is  (for  in  the  science  of  the  ancients 
the  two  terms  are  convertible,)  an  astrological  building. 
The  Birs  Nimroud,*  supposed  to  be  built  on  the  ruins  of 
the  tower  of  Babel,  was  also  built  for  astrologers.  The 
forms  of  these  buildings  testify  to  the  astronomical  pur- 
pose for  which  they  were  erected.  The  great  pyramid, 
like  the  inferior  buildings  copied  from  it,  was  most  care- 
fully oriented,  that  is,  the  four  sides  were  built  facing 
exactly  north,  south,  east,  and  west.  The  astronomical 
use  of  this  arrangement  is  manifest.  By  looking  along 
either  of  the  two  long  straight  sides  lying  east  and  west, 
the  astronomer  could  tell  the  true  east  or  west  points  of 
the  horizon,  and  determine  when  the  sun  rose  in  the  east  f 


*  Every  brick  hitherto  removed  from  this  edifice  bears  the  stamp  of 
King  Nebuchadnezzar.  It  affords  a  wonderful  idea  of  the  extent  and 
grandeur  of  the  building  raised  by  the  tyrants  of  old  times,  that  the 
ruins  of  a  single  building  on  the  site  of  Babylon  (Rich's  Kasr)  has  '  for 
ages  been  the  mine  from  which  the  builders  of  cities  rising  after  the  fall 
of  Babylon  have  obtained  their  materials. ' — Layard's  '  Nineveh. ' 

+  A  good  story  is  told  about  the  rising  of  the  sun  in  the  east,  the 
point  of  the  joke  being  different,  perhaps,  to  astronomers,  than  to 
others  : — A  certain  baron  was  noted  for  never  replying  directly,  even 
to  the  simplest  questions,  and  a  wager  was  laid  that,  if  he  were  asked 
whether  the  sun  rises  in  the  east  and  sets  in  the  west,  he  would  not 
answer  directly,  even  though  told  of  the  wager.  The  question  was  put, 
and  he  began — '  The  terms  east  and  west,  gentlemen,  are  conventional, 
but  admitting  that , '  the  rest  of  the  reply  was  lost,  the  wager 


Thoughts  on  Astrology.  319 

exactly,  or  set  exactly  in  the  west.  By  looking  along  the 
straight  sides  lying  north  and  south,  the  astronomer  could 
tell  when  the  sun,  or  any  other  celestial  body,  was  in  the 
meridian.  The  figure  of  the  pyramid  has  even  been  sup- 
posed to  symbolize  certain  astronomical  and  mathematical 
relations ;  and  a  long  slanting  passage,  opening  in  its 
northern  slope,  has  been  supposed  to  have  been  intended 
for  the  observation  of  the  star  Alpha  of  the  Dragon,  the  pole 
star  of  about  2,000  years  before  the  Christian  era.  Indeed, 
some  go  so  far  as  to  say  that  the  builders  of  the  great 
pyramid  were  instructed  by  a  divine  revelation  in  planning 
and  building  the  pyramid.  This  idea,  however,  seems  absurd 
on  the  face  of  it,  seeing  that  the  only  conceivable  object  of 
such  a  revelation  would  be  to  preserve  and  render  always 
available  certain  important  astronomical  relations ;  and 
the  pyramid  has  not  served  this  purpose,  no  one  having 
understood  it  (according  to  those  who  have  advanced  this 
view)  until  now,  when  the  building  has  lost  the  exactness 
of  figure  originally  given  to  it.  Tar  more  probably,  it 
symbolized  such  knowledge  as  the  astrologers  of  Chaldsea 
and  of  ancient  Egypt  possessed,  and  was  specially  intended 
to  advance  the  study  of  astrology,  from  which  men 
expected  to  gain  a  complete  knowledge  of  the  future. 
Proclus  informs  us  that  the  pyramids  terminated  at  the 

being  won,  which  was  all  the  enquirers  cared  for.  If  this  worthy  had 
answered  simply  '  Yes,  '  the  wager  would  have  been  lost,  but  the  reply 
would  not  have  been  correct ;  for  the  sun  never  has  risen  in  the  east 
and  set  in  the  west,  exactly,  at  any  place  or  on  any  day  since  the 
world  began.  If  the  sun  rises  due  east  on  any  day,  he  does  not  set  due 
west,  and  vice  versA. 


320  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

top  in  a  platform,  on  which  the  priests  made  their  celestial 
observations. 

The  figure  of  the  Babylonian  temple  of  astronomy  was 
probably  different,  though  it  is  possible  that  Nebuchad- 
nezzar altogether  modified  the  proportions  of  the  original 
temple.  We  may  infer  the  nature  of  the  earlier  use  of 
such  temples  from  later  usages.  We  learn  from  Diodorus 
Siculus  that,  in  the  midst  of  Babylon,  a  great  temple  was 
erected  by  Semiramis,  and  dedicated  to  Belus  or  Jupiter, 
'  and  that  on  its  roof  or  summit  the  Chaldean  astronomers 
contemplated,  and  exactly  noted,  the  risings  and  settings 
of  the  stars.' 

If  we  consider  the  manner  in  which  the  study  of  science, 
for  its  own  sake,  has  always  been  viewed  by  Oriental 
nations,  we  must  admit  that  these  great  buildings,  and 
these  elaborate  and  costly  arrangements  for  continued 
observation,  were  not  intended  to  advance  the  science  of 
astronomy.  Only  the  hope  that  results  of  extreme  value 
would  be  obtained  by  observing  the  heavenly  bodies 
could  have  led  the  monarchs  of  Assyria  and  of  Older 
Egypt  to  make  such  lavish  provision  of  money  and  labour 
for  the  erection  and  maintenance  of  astronomical  observa- 
tories. So  that,  apart  from  the  evidence  we  have  of  the 
astrological  object  of  celestial  observations  in  ancient 
times,  we  find  in  the  very  nature  of  the  buildings  erected 
for  observing  the  stars  the  clearest  proof  that  men  in  those 
times  hoped  to  gain  results  of  great  value  from  such  work. 
Now,  we  know  that  neither  the  improvement  of  navigation 
nor  increased  exactness  in  the  surveying  of  the  earth  were 


Thoughts  on  Astrology.  321 

aimed  at  by  those  who  built  those  ancient  observatories  : 
the  only  conceivable  object  they  can  have  had  was  the 
discovery  of  a  perfectly  trustworthy  system  of  prediction 
from  the  study  of  the  motions  of  the  heavenly  bodies. 
That  this  was  their  object  is  shewn  with  equal  clearness  by 
the  fact  that  such  a  system,  according  to  their  belief,  was 
deduced  from  these  observations,  and  was  for  ages  accepted 
without  question. 

Closely  associated  with  astrological  superstitions  was 
the  wide-spread  form  of  religion  called  Sabaism,  or  the 
worship  of  the  host  of  heaven  (Sabaoth).  It  is  not  easy  to 
determine  whether  the  worship  of  the  sun,  moon,  and 
planets,  preceded  or  followed  the  study  of  the  heavens  as 
a  means  of  divination.  It  is  probable  that  the  two  forms 
of  superstition  sprang  simultaneously  into  existence. 
The  shepherds  of  Chaldasa,  who 

'Watched  from  the  centres  of  their  sleeping  flocks 
Those  radiant  Mercuries,  that  seemed  to  move, 
Carrying  through  aether  in  perpetual  round, 
Decrees  and  resolutions  of  the  gods, 

can  hardly  have  regarded  the  planetary  movements  as 
indicating,  without  believing  that  those  movements 
actually  influenced,  the  fate  of  men  and  nations  ;  in  other 
words  the  idea  of  planetary  power  must  from  the  very 
beginning,  it  would  seen*,  Lave  been  associated  with  the 
idea  of  the  significance  of  planetary  motions.  Be  this  as 
it  may,  it  is  certain  that  in  the  earliest  times  of  which 
we  have  any  historical  record,  belief  in  astrology  was 
associated  with  the  worship  of  the  host  of  heaven.  In  the 


322  Our  Place  among  Infinities. 

Bible  record  we  find  the  teachers  and  rulers  of  the  Jewish 
nation  compelled  continually  to  struggle  against  the 
tendency  of  that  people  to  follow  surrounding  nations  in 
forsaking  the  worship  of  the  God  of  Sabaoth  for  the 
worship  of  Sabaoth,  turning  from  the  Creator  to  the 
creature.  They  would  seem  even,  as  the  only  means  of 
diverting  the  people  from  the  worship  of  those  false  gods, 
to  have  adopted  all  the  symbols  of  Sabaism,  explaining 
them,  however,  with  sole  reference  to  the  God  of  Sabaoth. 
Moses  adopted  in  this  way  the  four  forms  of  sacrifice  to 
which  the  Jewish  people  had  become  accustomed  in  Egypt 
— the  offerings  to  the  rising  and  setting  sun  (Numbers 
xxviii.  3,  4) ;  the  offerings  on  the  day  dedicated  to  the  planet 
Saturn,  chief  of  the  seven  star-gods  (Numbers  xxviii.  9)  ; 
the  offerings  to  the  new  moon  (Numbers  xxviii  11) ;  and 
the  offerings  for  the  luni-solar  festival  belonging  to  the  first 
month  of  the  sun's  annual  circuit  of  the  zodiacal  constella- 
tions (Numbers  xxviiL  16,  17).  All  these  offerings  were  in 
a  sense  sanctified  by  the  manner  in  which  he  enjoined  them, 
and  the  new  meaning  he  attached  to  them  ;  but  that  the 
original  offerings  were  Sabaistic  is  scarcely  open  to  question. 
The  tenacity,  indeed,  with  which  astrological  ceremonies 
and  superstitions  have  maintained  their  position,  even 
among  nations  utterly  rejecting  star-worship,  and  even  in 
times  when  astronomy  has  altogether  dispossessed  astro- 
logy, indicates  how  wide  and  deep  must  have  been  the 
influence  of  those  superstitions  in  remoter  ages.  Even  now 
the  hope  on  which  astrological  superstitions  were  based, 
the  hope  that  we  may  one  day  learn  to  lift  the  veil 


Thoughts  on  Astrology.  323 

concealing  the  future  from  our  view,  has  not  been 
altogether  abandoned.  The  wiser  reject  it  as  a  supersti- 
tion, but  even  the  wisest  have  at  one  time  or  other  felt  its 
delusive  influence. 


THE     END 


INTERNATIONAL  SCIENTIFIC  SERIES. 

NOW   READY. 

No.  1.  FORMS  OF  WATER,  in  Clouds,  Rain,  Rivers,  Ice,  and  Glaciers.  Bj 
Prof.  JOHN  TYNDALL,  LL.  D.,  F.  R.  S.  i  voL  Cloth.  Price,  $1.50. 

No.  2.  PHYSICS  AND  POLITICS;  or,  Thoughts  on  the  Application  of  the 
Principles  of  "  Natural  Selection"  and  "  Inheritance"  to  Political  Society. 
By  WALTER  BAGEHOT,  Esq.,  author  of  " The  English  Constitution."  i 
voL  Cloth.  Price,  $1.50. 

No.  3.  FOODS.  By  EDWARD  SMITH,  M.  D.,  LL.  B.,  F.  R.  S.  i  voL  Cloth. 
Price,  $1.75. 

No.  4.  MIND  AND  BODY.  The  Theories  of  their  Relation.  By  ALEX. 
BAIN,  LL.  D.,  Ptofessor  of  Logic  in  the  University  of  Aberdeen,  i  voL, 
i2mo.  Cloth.  Price,  $1.50. 

No.  5.  THE  STUDY  OF  SOCIOLOGY.  By  HERBERT  SPENCER.  Price, 
$1.50. 

No.  6.  THE  NEW  CHEMISTRY.  By  Prof.  JOSIAH  P.  COOKE,  Jr.,  of  Har- 
vard  University,  i  voL,  12010.  Cloth.  Price,  $2.00. 

No.  7.  THE  CONSERVATION  OF  ENERGY.  By  Prof.  BALFOUH 
STEWART,  LL.  D.,  F.  R.  S.  i  vol.,  i2mo.  Cloth.  Price,  $1.50. 

No.     8.  ANIMAL   LOCOMOTION;   or,  Walking,  Swimming,  and  Flying, 

with  a  Dissertation  on  Aeronautics.  By  J.  BELL  PETTIGREW,  M.  D., 

F.  R.  S.,  F.  R.  S.  E.,  F.  R.  C.  P.  E.  i  voL,  i2mo.      Fully  illustrated. 
Price,  $1.75. 

No.  9.  RESPONSIBILITY  IN  MENTAL  DISEASE.  By  HENRV 
MAUDSLEY,  M.  D.  i  vol.,  izmo.  Cloth.  Price,  $1.50. 

No.  10.  THE  SCIENCE  OF  LAW.  By  Prof.  SHELDON  AMOS,  i  vol.,  izmo. 
Cloth.  Price,  $1.75. 

No.  11.  ANIMAL  MECHANISM.  A  Treatise  on  Terrestrial  and  Aerial 
Locomotion.  By  E.  J.  MAREY.  With  117  Illustrations.  Price,  $1.75. 

No.  12.  THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  CONFLICT  BETWEEN  RE- 

LIGION   AND    SCIENCE.     By  JOHN  WM.  DRAPER,  M.  D.,  LL.  D., 
author  of  "  The  Intellectual  Development  of  Europe."    Price,  $1.75. 

No.  13.  THE  DOCTRINE   OF  DESCENT   AND  DARWINISM. 

By  Prof.  OSCAR  SCHMIDT,  Strasburg  University.     Price,  $1.50. 

No.  14.  THE  CHEMISTRY  OF  LIGHT  AND  PHOTOGRAPHY. 

In  its  Application  to  Art,  Science,  and  Industry.     By  Dr.  HERMANN  Vo- 
GEL.    too  Illustrations.     Price,  $2.00. 

No.  15.  FUNGI;  their  Nature,  Influence,  and  Uses.  By  M  C  COOKE,  M.  A., 
LL.  D.  Edited  by  Rev.  M.  J.  BERKELEY,  M.  A.,  F.  L.  S.  With  109 
Illustrations.  Price,  $1.50. 

No.  16.  THE  LIFE  AND  GROWTH  OF  LANGUAGE.  By  Prof. 
W.  D.  WHITNEY,  of  Yale  College.  Price,  $1.50. 

No.  17.  MONEY  AND  THE  MECHANISM  OF  EXCHANGE. 

By  W.  STANLEY  JEVONS,  M.  A.,  F.  R.  S.,  Professor_of  Logic  and  Politi- 
cal Economy  in  the  Owens  College,  Manchester.     Price,  $1.75. 

No.  18.  ANIMAL  PARASITES  AND  MESSMATES.  By  Monsieur 
VAN  BENEDEN,  Professor  of  the  University  of  Louvain,  Correspondent  ol 
the  Institute  of  France.  With  83  Illustrations.  (In  fress.) 

D.  APPLETON  &  CO.,  PUBLISHERS,  549  &  551  Broadway,  N.  Y. 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  SCIENTIFIC  SERIES. 


D.  APPLETON  &  Co.  have  the  pleasure  of  announcing  that  they  have  made  arrange, 
nents  for  publishing,  and  have  recently  commenced  the  issue  of,  a  SERIES  OF  POPU- 
LAR MONOGRAPHS,  or  small  works,  under  the  above  title,  which  will  embody  the  results 
of  tecent  inquiry  in  the  most  interesting  departments  of  advancing  science. 

The  character  and  scope  of  this  series  will  be  best  indicated  by  a  reference  to  the 
nai.ies  and  subjects  included  in  the  subjoined  list,  from  which  it  will  be  seen  that  the 
cooperation  of  the  most  distinguished  professors  in  England,  Germany,  France,  and  the 
United  States,  has  been  secured,  and  negotiations  are  pending  for  contributions  from 
other  eminent  scientific  writers. 

The  works  will  be  issued  in  New  York,  London,  Paris,  Leipsic,  Milan,  and  St. 
Petersburg. 

The  INTERNATIONAL  SCIENTIFIC  SERIES  is  entirely  an  American  project,  and  was 
originated  and  organized  by  Dr.  E.  L.  Youmans,  who  has  spent  much  time  in  Europe, 
arranging  with  authors  and  publishers. 

FORTHCOMING   VOLUMES. 

Prof.  W.  KINGDON  CLIFFORD,  M.  A.  The  First  Principles  of  the  Exact 
Sciences  explained  io  the  Non-mathematical. 

Prof.  T.  H.  HUXLEY,  LL.  D.,  F.  R.  S.     Bodily  Motion  and  Consciousness. 

Dr.  W.  B.  CARPENTER,  LL.  D.,  F.  R.  S.     The  Physical  Geography  of  the  Sea. 

Prof.  WILLIAM  ODLING,  F.  R.  S  The  Old  Chemistry  viewed  from  the  New 
Stand-point. 

W.  LAUDER  LINDSAY,  M.  D.,  F.  R.  S.  E.    Mind  in  the  Lower  Animals. 
Sir  JOHN  LUBBOCK,  Bart,  F.  R.  S.     On  A  nts  and  Bees. 

Prof.  W.  T.  THISELTON  DYER,  B.  A.,  B.  Sc.  Form  and  Habit  in  Flowering 
Plants. 

Mr.  J.  N.  LOCKYER,  F.  R.  S.     Spectrum  Analysis. 

Prof.  MICHAEL  FOSTER,  M.  D.     Protoplasm  and  the  Cell  Theory. 

H.  CHARLTON  BASTIAN,  M.  D.,  F.  R.  S.     The  Brain  as  an  Organ  of  Mind. 

Prof.  A.  C.  RAMSAY,  LL.  D.,  F.  R.  S.  Earth  Sculpture:  Hills,  Valleys,  Moun- 
tains, Plains,  Rivers,  Lakes;  How  they  were  Produced,  and  how  they  ka-vt 
been  Destroyed. 

P-of.  RUDOLPH  VIRCHOW  (Berlin  University).     Morbid  Physiological  Action. 
Prof.  CLAUDE  BERNARD.     History  of  the  Theories  of  Life. 

D.  APPLETON  &  CO.,  PUBLISHERS,  549  &  551  Broadway,  N.  Y. 


THE  INTERNATIONAL  SCIENTIFIC  SERIES. 


FORTHCOMING    VOLUMES. 

Ko£  H.  SAINTE-CLAIRE  DEVILLE.    An  Introduction  to  General  Chemistry. 

Prof.  WURTZ.    A  toms  and  the  A  tomic  Theory. 

Prot  De  QUATREFAGES.    The  Human  Race. 

Prof.  LACAZE-DUTHIERS.    Zoology  since  Cuvier. 

Prof.  BERTHELOT.     Chemical  Synthesis. 

Prof.  C.  A.  YOUNG,  Ph.  D.  (of  Dartmouth  College).    The  Sun. 

Prof.  OGDEN  N.  ROOD  (Columbia  College,  N.  Y.).    Modern  Chromatics  and  itt, 

Relations  to  A  rt  and  Industry. 

Dr.  EUGENE  LOMMEL  (University  of  Erlangen).     The  Nature  of  Light. 
Prof.  J.  ROSENTHAL.     General  Physiology  of  Muscles  and  Nerves. 
Prof.  JAMES  D.  DANA,  M.  A.,  LL.D.     On  CefhaUzation  ;  or,  Head-character* 

in  the  Gradation  and  Progress  of  Life. 

Prof.  S.  W.  JOHNSON,  M.  A.     On  the  Nutrition  of  Plants. 
Prof.  AUSTIN  FLINT,  Jr.,  M.  D.     The  Nervous  System,  and  its  Reuition  to  ikt 

Bodily  Functions. 

Prof.  BERNSTEIN  (University  of  Halle).     The  Five  Senses  of  Man. 
Prof.  FERDINAND  COHN  (Breslau  University).     Thallofhytes  (Alga,  Lichem 

Fungi). 

Prof.  HERMANN  (University  of  Zurich).    Respiration. 

Prof.  LEUCKART  (University  of  Leipsic).     Outlines  of  Animal  Organization. 
Prof.  LIEBREICH  (University  of  Berlin).     Outlines  of  Toxicology. 
Prof.  KUNDT  (University  of  Strasburg).     On  Sound. 
Prof.  REES  (University  of  Erlangen).     On  Parasitic  Plants. 
Prof.  STEINTHAL  (University  of  Berlin).     Outlines  of  the  Science  of  Language. 
P.  BERT  (Professor  of  Physiology,  Paris).    Forms  of  Life  and  other  Cosmical  Cor- 

ditions. 

E,  ALGLAVE  (Professor  of  Constitutional  and  Administrative  Law  at  Douai,  and  ol 
Political  Economy  at  Lille).     The  Primitive  Elements  of  Political  Constitutions. 
P    LORAIN  (Professor  of  Medicine,  Paris).    Modern  Epidemics. 
Prof.    SCHUTZENBERGER  pirector  of  the  Chemical  Laboratory  at  the  Sor 

bonne).     On  Fermentations. 

Mons.  FREIDEL.     The  Functions  of  Organic  Chemistry. 
Mons.  DEBRAY.    Precious  Metals. 

Prof.  CORFIELD,  M.  A.,  M.  D.  (Oxon.).     A  ir  in  its  Relation  to  Health. 
Prof.  A,  GIARD.     General  Embryology. 

D.  APPLETON  &  CO.,  PUBLISHERS,  549  &  551  Broadway,  N.  Y. 


THE  EXPANSE  OF  HEAVEN; 

A  Series  of  Essays  on  the  Wonders  of  the  Firmament. 

By  R.   A.    PROCTOR,   B.  A. 
I  vol.,  I2mo.     Cloth Price,  $2.00. 

"  It  is  Mr.  Proctor's  good  fortune  that  not  only  is  he  one  of  the  great- 
est of  living  astronomers,  but  that  he  has  a  power  of  imparting  knowl- 
edge that  is  not  equaled  by  any  living  astronomer.  His  style  is  as 
lucid  as  the  light  with  which  he  deals  so  largely,  and  the  plainest  of 
readers  can  go  along  with  him  with  entire  ease,  and  comprehend  all 
that  he  says  on  the  grandest  subject  ever  discussed  by  mortal  intelli- 
gence. Most  scientific  writers  either  cannot  or  will  not  so  use  the  pen 
as  to  make  themselves  understood  by  the  many;  not  so  with  Mr. 
Proctor :  he  both  can  and  does  so  write  as  to  command  the  attention  of 
the  million,  and  this  too  without  in  the  least  derogating  from  the  real 
dignity  of  his  sublime  theme.  Few  of  us  can  study  astronomy,  because 
that  implies  a  concentrated  devotion  to  an  inexhaustible  matter,  but 
we  all  can  read  astronomical  works  to  our  great  advantage  if  astrono- 
mers who  write  will  but  write  plainly ;  and  in  that  way,  without  having 
the  slightest  claim  to  be  spoken  of  as  "scientists,"  we  can  acquire  no 
ordinary  amount  of  knowledge  concerning  things  that  are  of  the  loftiest 
nature,  and  the  effect  of  which  must  be  to  elevate  the  mind.  Such  a 
book  as  '  The  Expanse  of  Heaven  '  cannot  fail  to  be  of  immense  use 
in  forwarding  the  work  of  education  even  when  it  is  read  only  for 
amusement,  so  forcible  is  the  impression  it  makes  on  the  mind  from 
the  importance  of  the  subjects  treated  of,  while  the  manner  of  treat- 
ment is  so  good." — Boston  Traveller. 

"  Since  the  appearance  of  Ennis's  book  on  '  The  Origin  of  the 
Stars,'  we  have  not  read  a  more  attractive  work  on  astronomy  than 
this.  It  is  learned  enough  to  be  instructive,  and  light  enough  to  be 
very  entertaining." — Alta  California. 

"  It  reads  like  a  work  of  fiction,  so  smooth  and  consecutive  is  it; 
but  it  inspires  the  worthiest  thoughts  and  the  highest  aspirations." — 
Boston  Commonwealth. 

"  Perfectly  adapted  to  their  purposes,  namely,  to  awaken  a  love  for 
science,  and  at  the  same  time  to  convey,  in  a  pleasant  manner,  some 
elementary  facts." — Church  Herald. 

"This  is  not  a  technically  scientific  work,  but  an  expression  of  a 
true  scholar's  conception  of  the  vastness  and  grandeur  of  the  heavens. 
There  is  no  dry  detail,  but  blended  with  the  scholar's  discoveries  are 
the  poet's  thoughts,  and  a  true  recognition  of  the  Almighty's  power." 
— Troy  Times. 

D.  APPLETON  &  CO.,  Publishers, 

549  &  551  BROADWAY,  N.  Y. 


JUST     PUBLISHED. 


Money  and  the  Mechanism  of  Exchange. 

Vol.  XVII.  of  the  INTEBNATIONAL  SCIENTIFIC  SERIES.  By  "W.  STANLEY  JEVONS,  M.  A., 
F.  E.  S.,  Professor  of  Logic  and  Political  Economy  in  the  Owens  College,  Man- 
chester. 1  vol.,  12mo.  Cloth.  Price,  $1.75. 

"  He  offers  us  what  a  clear-sighted,  cool-headed,  scientific  student  has  to  say  on  the 
nature,  properties,  and  natural  laws  of  money,  without  regard  to  local  interests  or  na- 
tional bias.  His  work  is  popularly  written,  and  every  page  is  replete  with  solid  instruc- 
tion of  a  kind  that  is  just  now  lamentably  needed  by  multitudes  of  our  people  who  are 
victimized  by  the  grossest  fallacies." — Popular  Science  Monthly, 

"  If  Professor  Jevons's  book  is  read  as  extensively  as  it  deserves  to  be,  we  shall 
have  sounder  views  on  the  use  and  abuse  of  money,  and  more  correct  ideas  on  what  a 
circulating  medium  really  means." — Boston  Saturday  Evening  Gazette. 

"  Prof.  Jevons  writes  in  a  sprightly  but  colorless  style,  without  trace  of  either 
prejudice  or  mannerism,  and  shows  no  commitment  to  any  theory.  The  time  is  not 
very  far  distant,  we  hope,  when  legislators  will  cease  attempting  to  legislate  upon 
money  before  they  know  what  money  is,  and,  as  a  possible  help  toward  such  a  change, 
Prof.  Jevons  deserves  the  credit  of  having  made  a  useful  contribution  to  a  depart- 
ment of  study  long  too  much  neglected,  but  of  late  years,  we  are  gratified  to  say,  be- 
coming less  so."—  The  Financier,  New  York. 


Weights,  Measures,  and  Money,  of  all  Nations. 

Compiled  by  F.  "W.  CLABKE,  S.  B.,  Professor  of  Physics  and  Chemistry  in  the  Uni- 
versity of  Cincinnati.  Price,  $1.50. 

"  This  work  will  be  found  very  useful  to  the  merchant,  economist,  and  banker,  as 
the  arrangement  is  highly  convenient  for  reference,  and  in  a  form  and  classification 
never  before  presented  to  the  public.  It  also  contains  a  series  of  tables,  arranged  alpha- 
betically, showing  the  value  of  each  unit  as  given  both  in  the  English  and  the  metric 
standards.  The  metric  system  is  used  coextensively  with  the  ordinary  system,  and 
is  a  characteristic  feature  of  the  book. 

"  The  contents,  among  other  things,  contain  the  following  useful  and  comprehen- 
sive tables,  viz. :  I.  Measures  of  Length,  in  both  the  English  or  American  feet  or 
inches,  and  in  French  metres.  II.  Road-Measures  in  English  miles  and  French  kilo- 
metres. III.  Land-Measures.  IV.  Cubic  Measures.  V.  Liquid  Measures.  VI. 
Dry  Measures.  VII.  Weights,  and  finally  Money.  This  latter  table  is  one  of  the  most 
useful  and  valuable  tables  probably  to  be  found,  giving  as  it  does  the  standards  in 
dollars,  francs,  sterling,  and  marks,  and  alone  is  worth  the  cost  of  the  book." — N.  Y. 
Commercial  and  Financial  Chronicle. 

"  "We  commend  this  carefully-prepared  and  convenient  volume  to.  all  persons  who 
wish  to  acquire  information  on  the  subject  of  which  it  treats." — Boston  Globe. 

"The  work  necessary  to  the  production  of  this  little  volume  has  been  judiciously 
planned  and  skillfully  executed."—  Chicago  Tribune, 

D.  APPLETON  &  CO.,  PUBLISHERS,  549  &  551  Broadway,  N.  Y. 


A  New  Magazine  for  Students  and  Cultivated  Readers. 


THE 


POPULAR  SCIENCE  MONTHLY, 


CONDUCTED    BY 
Professor  E.    L.   YOUMANS. 


THE  growing  importance  of  scientific  knowledge  to  all  classes  of  thr 
community  calls  for  more  efficient  means  of  diffusing  it.  THE  POPULAR 
SCIENCE  MONTHLY  has  been  started  to  promote  this  object,  and  supplies  a 
want  met  by  no  other  periodical  in  the  United  States. 

It  contains  instructive  and  attractive  articles,  and  abstract?  of  articles, 
original,  selected,  and  illustrated,  from  the  leading  scientific  men  of  differ- 
ent countries,  giving  the  latest  interpretations  of  natural  phenomena,  ex- 
plaining the  applications  of  science  to  the  practical  arts,  and  to  the  opera- 
tions of  domestic  life. 

It  is  designed  to  give  especial  prominence  to  those  branches  of  science 
which  help  to  a  better  understanding  of  the  nature  of  man  ;  to  present  the 
claims  of  scientific  education  ;  and  the  bearings  of  science  upon  questions 
of  society  and  government.  How  the  various  subjects  of  current  opinion 
are  affected  by  the  advance  of  scientific  inquiry  will  also  be  considered. 

In  its  literary  character,  this  periodical  aims  to  be  popular,  without  be- 
ing superficial,  and  appeals  to  the  intelligent  reading-classes  of  the  commu- 
nity. It  seeks  to  procure  authentic  statements  from  men  who  know  their 
subjects,  and  who  will  address  the  non-scientific  public  for  purposes  of  ex- 
position and  explanation. 

It  will  have  contributions  from  HERBERT  SPENCER,  Professor  HUXLEY, 
Professor  TYNDALL,  Mr.  DARWIN,  and  other  writers  identified  with  specu- 
lative thought  and  scientific  investigation. 

THE  POPULAR  SCIENCE  MONTHLY  is  published  in  a  large 
octavo,  handsomely  printed  on  clear  type.  Terms-,  Five  Dollars  per  annum, 
or  Fifty  Cents  per  copy. 

OPINIONS  OF  THE   PRESS. 

"Just  the  publication  needed  at  the  present  day."  —  Montreal  Cazette. 
"  It  is,  beyond  comparison,  the  best  attempt  at  journalism  of  the  kind  ever  made  in  tlrio 
country."  —  Home  Journal, 

"  The  initial  number  is  admirably  constituted."  —  Evening  if  ail. 

"  In  our  opinion,  the  right  idea  has  been  happily  hit  in  the  plan  of  this  new  monthly." 


Courier. 

A  journal  which  promises  to  be  of  eminent  value  to  the  cause  of  popular  education  IB 
thi»  country."  —  If.  Y.  Tribune. 

IMPORTANT  TO  CLUBS. 

THK  POPULAR  SCIENCE  MONTHLY  will  be  supplied  at  reduced  rates  with  any  periodi- 
cal published  in  this  country. 

Any  person  remitting  Twenty  Dollars  for  four  yearly  subscriptions  will  receive  an  ex- 
tra copy  gratis,  or  five  yearly  subscriptions  for  $20. 
THE  POPULAR  SCIENCE  MONTHLY  and  APPLETONS'  JOURNAL  (weekly),  per  annum,  $8.oc 

Kp"  Payment,  in  all  cases,  must  be  in  advance. 

Remittances  should  be  made  by  postal  money-order  or  check  to  the  Publishers, 

2).  AFFLETON  &  CO.,  549  &  551  Broadway,  New  York. 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


AA    001  175145   0 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

305  De  Neve  Drive  -  Parking  Lot  17  •  Box  951388 

LOS  ANGELES,  CALIFORNIA  90095-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library  from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


fl/W  012007 


